MANILA — The Sandiganbayan has denied the motion for reconsideration filed by Macao-based businessman Jack Lam in connection with charges over alleged “gift-giving” linked to a 2016 bribery controversy involving former immigration officials.

In a resolution dated April 14, the anti-graft court’s Sixth Division junked Lam’s plea for lack of merit. The ruling was penned by Associate Justice Sara Fernandez.

Lam had sought a review of the court’s March 27 decision upholding his indictment for violating Presidential Decree No. 46, which penalizes the act of giving gifts to government officials and employees.

The case stems from allegations that Lam coursed tens of millions of pesos through Wenceslao Sombero Jr. to former Bureau of Immigration (BI) deputy commissioners Al Argosino and Michael B. Robles in exchange for the release of detained Chinese nationals working at Fontana Leisure Parks and Casino in Clark, Pampanga in 2016.

Argosino and Robles are facing separate charges for violations of Republic Act 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, as well as plunder.

In his motion, Lam argued that he should not have been charged, claiming he was a victim of a conspiracy involving Argosino, Robles, and Sombero.

He also maintained that Sombero was the one who handed over the money, adding that allegations linking the funds to him were insufficient to establish a prima facie case with reasonable certainty of conviction.

The Sandiganbayan, however, ruled that such arguments do not constitute valid grounds to quash the information under existing court rules.

It also clarified that the 2024 Department of Justice rules requiring stricter standards of evidence in preliminary investigations do not apply to Lam’s case.

“The said DOJ issuance finds no application in the present case because it specifically applies to preliminary investigations and inquest proceedings in all prosecution offices,” the tribunal said.

“More importantly, the information was filed way back on March 23, 2018. Whether there was prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty of conviction or there was probable cause to indict the accused in court is a matter better raised during the preliminary investigation, which had long been terminated,” it added.