Business Circuit

No justice for the poor

Roderick German tries to make an honest living buying second-hand stuff in Sta. Maria, Bulacan. He makes enough to support a wife and two kids.

Dedicated to honest work, Roderick has never been involved in any hanky panky.

But he now stands charged with estafa in Malolos. He cannot understand what happened to him. First, he does not know the complainant in the case, a certain Marilen Bagalacsa.

Even more important is the fact that he swears he never received a copy of the complaint supposed to have been filed by Bagalacsa.

He was denied the right to file an answer to the complaint.

How it happened that Eduardo G. Dela Cruz, 2nd assistant provincial prosecutor in Bulacan, found probably cause without hearing the side of the complaint, is really for the books.

But Roderick German is not a book. He is flesh and blood, alive but not well. Not having much of an education, he is now worried where his case will bring him. Maybe jail because he does not have money for better lawyers or political connections to help him obtain justice.

Maybe he has hope in the sometimes kind heart of Justice Secretary Raul M. Gonzales. But we cannot assure him that. He leaves his fate to God. But God does not interfere in the miscarriage of justice.

About a piece of junk

I tried to help Roderick sometime early last year when he came to me complaining that a group of people, claiming to be policemen, were menacingly looking at him in his shop in Sta. Maria, Bulacan.

I sought the help of PNP. General Bartolome assured me that since there are no charges against Roderick, he should be left alone. Indeed, he was left alone.

People who said they are policemen stopped accusing him of fencing, having bought a dilapidated bus that he cut into pieces for junk.

Life went normally for Roderick. He was left alone. I assured him that there is General Bartolome to call on.

Little did he know that a certain Marilen Bagalacsa filed a complaint for fencing against him but the prosecutor found probable cause for estafa.

Some years back, he bought the junk of a passenger bus from a certain Robin Arenas who produced a machine copy of the vehicles registration in his name. Roderick believed that Arenas owned the bus. A certain Lecaros testified that Arenas was the owner.

Funny, both of them had a special power of attorney to sell the vehicle. The document was not necessary because Robin Arenas said he owned it. And he had a copy of the certificate of registration.

Unidentified complainant

I thought that it is mandatory for prosecutors to mention the name or names of complainants when a complaint is filed before them. In a resolution recommending criminal prosecution of Roderick German, Eduardo G. Dela Cruz, 2nd assistant provincial prosecutor, the name of the complainant, Marilen Bagalacsa was mentioned only once as complaining against German.

The body of the resolution does not mention her name. There was no narration, presumably based on the complaint, on how German committed the crime of fencing which the Dela Cruz upgraded to estafa.

How the alleged crime became estafa from an original complaint of fencing was not clearly explained either.

All of these, specifically the failure or refusal of the prosecutor to narrate how German committed the crime, clearly suggests that the defendant is being set up for a crime he did not commit.

Granting that there was an allegation that he did, the respondent has the right to get a copy of the complaint and file a reply. There is no showing that this happened.

If it did, the prosecutor would have explained how the complainant lost the junk bus to German.

Not lost

It is most significant to note that the resolution states that "bus was actually not a lost vehicle, though complainant reported it to be. It is stated in the resolution that "the released (sic) by T.G.F.C. Towing Services to BCB (the bus company that presumably owned the old vehicle) on April 24, 2008 was legitimate since it was the registered owner."

The resolution went on to say that "however, the alleged authority to dispose the bus on even date is highly suspicious not to mention that a mere operations manager and a liaison officer can legally issue such an authority which is an act of dominion vested only to its rightful owner, which is the board of directors considering that the owner is a corporation.

"It therefore needs a special power of attorney. Clearly, it is estafa perpetuated not only by the herein respondent but in conspiracy with respondents Robinson Arenas and Arvin Lecaros who regrettably were not made respondents and no preliminary investigation made against them."

A squeeze play

The first question I want to ask the complainant, Marilen Bagalacsa, is why she did not complain against Robinson Arenas and Arvin Lecaros.

They are the persons who sold the old bus to Roderick German. In fact, German bought the bus on the strength of a machine copy of a certificate of registration and a special power of attorney.

Based on these facts and events, it clearly appears that that Roderick German is a buyer in good faith and that Arenas and Lecaros might be involved in what seems to be a fraud.

The fact that neither of them was complained of by Marilen Bagalacsa is also a clear suggestion that Arenas and Lecaros are involved or seem to be involved in a squeeze play.

The victim is the ill-educated, hard-working young husband Roderick German who does not have enough money to hire a reasonably good lawyer.