MANILA, Philippines — The Sandiganbayan has turned down motions for reconsideration filed by the accused individuals in one of the Pharmally contracts cases, questioning the Ombudsman’s withdrawal of the charges in the meantime to re-examine the same. In a six-page resolution promulgated on Dec. 12, 2025 and written by Associate Justice Maria Theresa Mendoza-Arcega, the anti-graft court’s First Division denied the motions filed by the accused, claiming the accused "failed to raise any new and substantial arguments, and no cogent reason exists to warrant a reconsideration of the Court’s resolution." "Furthermore, the Court finds that the motions raise arguments that have already been passed upon. Reconsideration on that ground may also be denied summarily,” it added. The court had granted the motion to withdraw the information filed by the prosecution to allow the Office of the Ombudsman to re-examine and restudy the cases through a thorough reinvestigation for violation of Republic Act 3019 (Anti-Graft Law). Similar motions to withdraw criminal charges against the accused had been granted by the Sandiganbayan in the other Pharmally cases after Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla directed the Office of the Special Prosecutor to seek the withdrawal of Pharmally cases that have not yet reached arraignment. Remulla reasoned that these cases filed by his predecessor Samuel Martires must be reevaluated because some facts and evidence were supposedly not considered and “seem to be intentionally weakened.” The motions for reconsideration denied for lack of merit were filed by accused former Department of Budget and Management Procurement Service officer-in-charge Lloyd Christopher A. Lao, Pharmally Pharmaceutical director Linconn U. Ong, financial manager Lin Weixiong, former deputy Ombudsman Warren Rex Liong, and Pharmally corporate secretary Mohit C. Dargani. The accused claimed the Sandiganbayan should not have allowed the withdrawal of the criminal charges, saying it "compromised the efficient administration of justice and judicial stability and allowed itself to be unwitting tools of abuse and injustice for the advancement of political ends. " The charges before Sandigan's First Division involve Section 3(e) of the Philippines' Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019) which penalizes public officers for causing undue injury to any party (including the government) or giving unwarranted benefits/advantages to private individuals through manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence in the performance of their official duties, especially concerning licenses, permits, or concessions. This provision criminalizes corrupt acts where officials abuse their power to favor someone or harm others, even without personal financial gain, by acting with clear bias, dishonesty, or extreme carelessness. PNA