Court rejects move to delay jail term of ex-Zamboanga prosecutor in bribery try

MANILA, Philippines – The anti-graft court Sandiganbayan has denied a bid by a former government prosecutor to delay the execution of her graft conviction, clearing the way for her to serve a 10-year prison sentence.

The Sandiganbayan’s 6th Division, in a June 18 resolution, said there was no basis to defer the execution of the judgment against former Zamboanga City deputy prosecutor Roselyn Murillo-Mamon after the Supreme Court upheld her conviction and issued an entry of judgment on October 1, 2025.

In a seven-page resolution penned by Associate Justice Sarah Jane Fernandez and concurred in by Associate Justices Kevin Narce Vivero and Lord Villanueva, the Sandiganbayan said there was no basis to halt the execution of the judgment, noting that the SC had not issued any directive suspending proceedings.

The case stemmed from the July 2021 graft conviction of Mamon over an attempt to bribe Police Staff Sergeant Flavio Enriquez into sparing the two clients of defense lawyer Pherham Surian Saiddi from a criminal case.

Enriquez, the complainant in a frustrated murder case arising from a 2013 shooting in which he was wounded while serving a warrant on an alleged drug suspect, testified that Mamon repeatedly urged him to leave out the names of Saiddi’s clients, Dadoh Mansul and police officer Phon Mohammad, from his account of the attack.

According to Enriquez, he was offered P300,000 in exchange for excluding the two men from his testimony and identifying only the alleged gunman as responsible.

He later reported the alleged bribery attempt to his superiors, who sought the assistance of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI). An entrapment operation led to the arrest of the prosecutor and the lawyer on August 16, 2013.

In seeking to postpone the implementation of her sentence, Mamon told the anti-graft court that she had appealed her conviction and was still awaiting clarification from the SC regarding the status of her filing. She maintained that she had not been informed that her appeal had already been denied.

Prosecutors opposed the request, arguing that any further delay would merely postpone the enforcement of a conviction that had already been affirmed by the SC.

The Sandiganbayan agreed, citing the SC’s October 1, 2025 ruling which stated that “[no further] pleadings, motions, letters or other communications shall be entertained…” The anti-graft court said that simply means that ”there is no further remedy available to the accused to forestall the issuance of the Entry of Judgment.”  – Rappler.com