G.R. No. 205172 , June 15, 2021
Herminio T. Disini, Petitioner, vs. Republic of the Philippines, Respondent.

FACTS

The Republic, through the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), filed a complaint for reconveyance, reversion, accounting, restitution, and damages against Herminio T. Disini, former President Ferdinand Marcos, and Imelda Marcos for amassing ill-gotten wealth. The Republic alleged that Disini, a close associate of President Marcos, received special concessions in relation to the award of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) contract to Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Westinghouse) and Burns & Roe, Inc. (B&R). Disini allegedly received substantial commissions from these companies for influencing the award and execution of the contract. During trial, only the Republic presented evidence as Disini was declared in default after summons remained unserved and after summons by publication was completed. The Republic presented witnesses and documentary evidence, including a summary (Exhibit E-9) purportedly showing Disini’s commissions. The Sandiganbayan, in its April 11, 2012 Decision, declared the commissions received by Disini totaling $50,562,500.00 as ill-gotten wealth and ordered him to account for and reconvey this amount to the Republic. The Sandiganbayan found that Disini used his close personal association with President Marcos to secure the BNPP contract for Westinghouse and B&R in exchange for commissions, but found no evidence that President Marcos or Imelda Marcos received any part of these commissions. Both parties filed motions for reconsideration, which were denied by the Sandiganbayan in its October 24, 2012 Resolution.

ISSUE

Whether the Sandiganbayan erred in declaring the commissions received by Disini from Westinghouse and B&R in connection with the BNPP project as ill-gotten wealth and ordering him to account for and reconvey the amount of $50,562,500.00 to the Republic.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Sandiganbayan’s Decision and Resolution. The Court held that the Sandiganbayan correctly declared the commissions as ill-gotten wealth. The evidence, particularly the testimonies of witnesses Manahan, Vergara, and Jacob, established that Disini, a close associate of President Marcos, served as a Special Sales Representative for Westinghouse and B&R, using his influence to secure the BNPP contract in exchange for substantial commissions. The Court found that the Sandiganbayan’s reliance on these testimonies and on Exhibit E-9 (Disini’s summary of commissions) was proper. The Court also ruled that the Sandiganbayan did not err in not holding President Marcos liable, as the Republic failed to prove he received any part of the commissions. Furthermore, the Court upheld the denial of the Republic’s claim for damages, attorney’s fees, and litigation expenses due to insufficient proof. The Court also found no merit in Disini’s procedural arguments, including his claim of being denied due process due to the default order, as he had available remedies which he did not timely avail.