This is an AI-generated summary, which may contain errors. For context, always refer to the full article.
The case stems from the 2021 conviction of former Zamboanga deputy prosecutor Roselyn Murillo-Mamon for attempting to bribe the police to spare two men from a botched murder case.
MANILA, Philippines – The anti-graft court Sandiganbayan has denied a former government prosecutor’s request to delay the execution of his corruption conviction, paving the way for him to serve 10 years in prison.
The 6th Division of The Sandiganbayan, in a June 18 resolution, said there is no basis to stay the execution of the sentence against former Zamboanga City deputy prosecutor Roselyn Murillo-Mamon after the Supreme Court upheld her conviction and entered judgment on October 1, 2025.
In a seven-page resolution written by Associate Justice Sarah Jane Fernandez and concurred with by Associate Justices Kevin Narce Vivero and Lord Villanueva, the Sandiganbayan said there is no basis to stay the execution of the sentence, noting that the SC did not issue any order to stay the proceedings.
The case stemmed from Mamon’s July 2021 corruption conviction for attempting to bribe Police Sergeant Flavio Enriquez to spare two clients of lawyer Pherham Surian Saiddi from a criminal case.
Enriquez, the plaintiff in a botched homicide case stemming from a 2013 shooting in which he was injured while serving a warrant on a drug suspect, testified that Mamon repeatedly pressured him to omit 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 the two men from his testimony and only identifying the person who allegedly had the gun involved.
He later reported the alleged bribery attempt to his superiors, who sought the help of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI). The sting operation led to the arrest of the prosecutor and lawyer on August 16, 2013.
In seeking to postpone the execution of his sentence, Mamon told the anti-corruption court that he has appealed against his sentence and is still awaiting clarification from the SC on the status of his release. He maintained that he had not been informed that his appeal had already been rejected.
Prosecutors opposed the request, saying that any further delay would only postpone the execution of the sentence that had already been confirmed by the SC.
The Sandiganbayan agreed, issuing the SC’s decision of October 1, 2025 which stated that “(no further) pleadings, motions, letters or other communications shall be entertained…” The anti-corruption court said that means that “no further remedy is available to the accused to prevent the issuance of Entry of Judgment.” – Rappler.com
