The creation of two Sandiganbayan special divisions to exclusively handle cases involving anomalies in the use of the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) could result in inconsistent and opposing rulings, Cavite Rep. Elpidio Barzaga Jr. warned.

Barzaga, the vice president for external affair of the National Unity Party (NUP) said this proposal of the Office of the Ombudsman would mean the two courts would be separate and distinct from one another, which could lead to the possibility of different rulings in cases like petitions for bail, arrests, the existence of probable cause and other matters.

“It is even possible that in one court it is a judgment of conviction and judgment of acquittal on the other court,” Barzaga said.

Barzaga was referring to the request of Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales, in a letter to Chief Justice Lourdes Sereno, urging the creation of at least two special divisions of the anti-graft court to “to exclusively try and conduct continuous trial” of the criminal cases filed in connection with the alleged misuse of the PDAF.

Barzaga said  the Ombudsman’s request was “well-motivated but ill-advised.”

“To avoid these possibilities of different rulings and in order not to unduly confuse the public in the event of conflicting orders from two special courts, it would be more prudent, to have one instead of two special courts,” said Barzaga.

“After all, based on current statistics, one division in the Sandiganbayan handles on the average 300 cases and therefore one special court could handle effectively all the present pork barrel cases.”

The Ombudsman has already filed with the Sandiganbayan charges of plunder against alleged PDAF scam mastermind Janet Lim Napoles and several high-ranking government officials in the first of a series of cases expected to involve hundreds of respondents in the P10-billion PDAF scam.