SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 135715. September 5, 2012.]
PRESIDENTIAL AD HOC FACT-FINDING COMMITTEE ON BEHEST LOANS, petitioner, v. HONORABLE ANIANO DESIERTO, ET AL., respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 05 September 2012 which reads as follows:
G.R. No. 135715 (Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-Finding Committee on Behest Loans, v. Honorable Aniano Desierto, et al.).
In Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-Finding Committee on Behest Loans v. Hon. Aniano Desierto, Panfilo O. Domingo, Conrado Reyes, Enrique Herboza, Mohammad Ali Dimaporo, Abdullah Dimaporo and Amer Dianalan, a Decision 1 which this Court promulgated on 13 April 2011, this Court ruled that:
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Ombudsman is hereby ORDERED to:
1. DISMISS the complaint against deceased respondent Conrado Reyes;
2. REQUIRE the counsels of respondents Panfilo Domingo and Mohammad Ali Dimaporo to submit proof of their deaths; and
3. FILE with the Sandiganbayan the necessary Information against respondents Abdullah Dimaporo, Amer Dianalan, Enrique Herboza, and Ricardo Sunga. 2
After the lapse of one year from the promulgation of this Decision, no Information has been filed yet with the Sandiganbayan. EAcIST
Abdullah Dimaporo (Abdullah), after denial of his Motion for Reconsideration (dated 24 May 2011), and Another Verified Motion for Reconsideration (dated 12 September 2011) which this Court treated as a Second Motion for Reconsideration, 3 is once again before this Court for "Omnibus Motion with Leave of Court to File Verified Motion for Preliminary Investigation and to Admit this Verified Motion for Preliminary Investigation" (dated 9 March 2012), reiterating his previous prayers to remand the case to the Office of the Ombudsman for the conduct of the preliminary investigation/re-investigation, 4 for this reason:
. . . [A]side from the April 13, 2011 Decision [which he came to know only through concerned acquaintances, Abdullah] had not received any of the previous notices, orders, resolutions or any processes in connection with this case; 5 . . . [he] was not even made aware of its continuance, 6 . . . [and that records show that] [a]ll the processes . . . were "returned to sender" with the glaring notation of insufficient address . . . . 7
The return cards, however, sent to Abdullah at his two addresses, i.e., 10 Navarro St., Corinthian Plaza, 1100 Quezon City and/or Pauyan Karomatan 9215 Lanao del Norte, were consistently received by his agents from 1999 until 2012. 8 This includes his receipt of the notice of judgment containing the 13 April 2011 Decision of this Court which was received on 5 May 2011. 9
Interestingly, a Court Notice of the Resolution dated 15 June 2011 sent to Abdullah was indeed returned to sender with annotation of insufficient address. 10 It did not escape this Court, however, that this was not after the third attempt, the first attempt of which having been refused to be received by Abdullah's secretary. 11
Abdullah's latest pleading dated 9 March 2012, was submitted through his counsel George Erwin Garcia, despite repeated warnings from this Court that a second motion for reconsideration is a prohibited pleading and that no further pleadings or motions shall be entertained in this case. 12 To the mind of this Court, this Counsel not only defied this Court's prohibition of filing pleadings after denial of the motion for reconsideration, the same counsel tried to mislead us into believing that his client was denied of due process when this Court decided a case without allowing the latter the chance to be heard. SaAcHE
With the foregoing premises, the Court RESOLVES to:
1. DENY the Omnibus Motion with Leave of Court to File Verified Motion for Preliminary Investigation and to Admit this Verified Motion for Preliminary Investigation dated 9 March 2012 for lack of merit;
2. DISPENSE with the submission by the PCGG of the current and complete address of respondent Ricardo Sunga, the records having revealed that the same received some of the notices of this Court, even after he has purportedly "moved out" from his address; 13
3. DECLARE this Court's Decision dated 13 April 2011 FINAL and EXECUTORY; and
4. DIRECT the OMBUDSMAN to IMMEDIATELY FILE the Information with the Sandiganbayan after receipt of the Notice of Entry of Judgment;
No further pleadings or motions shall be entertained in this case. Let entry of final judgment be made in due course.
SO ORDERED. cATDIH
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) MA. LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 380-398.
2.Id. at 396-397.
3.Id. at 569-570.
4.Id. at 591.
5.Id. at 575-576.
6.Id. at 576.
7.Id. at 578.
8.Return Cards. Id. at 204, 231, 284, 336, 348, 351, 360, 370, 378, 397 (all attached at the back).
9.Id. at 378 (attached at the back).
10.Id. at 567 (attached at the back).
11.Id.
12.Id. at 571.
13.Id. at 215, 286, 331, 347.