The Sandiganbayan yesterday set the hearings after making public a Feb. 23 order resurrecting the cases against the widow of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos. The cases have been dormant for more than two years.

In the third legal strike against the Marcoses this year, the anti-graft court denied Ms Marcos's second appeal seeking to dismiss the graft charges against her, calling her arguments ''befuddle(d).''

She allegedly committed the crimes while she was a member of the Interim Batasang Pambansa from 1978 to 1984.

In a nine-page resolution, the Sandiganbayan's third division gave the green light to try Ms Marcos for directly and indirectly managing the Swiss foundations Maler, Palmy, Rayby and Trinidad, four of the 12 Swiss foundations which controlled the family's Swiss accounts. The funds are now held in escrow at the Philippine National Bank.

The fifth graft case arose from her ''securing and heavily recommending'' the approval by then Central Bank Governor Jaime Laya for a $25-million loan applied for in 1982 by Asian Reliability Corp., owned by Marcos crony Vicente Chuidian.

All five cases were filed on Dec. 16, 1991 by Ombudsman Conrado Vasquez with the Sandiganbayan.

The criminal cases are not to be confused with the civil forfeiture case of the Marcos estate pending for the past seven years before the Sandiganbayan.

The resolution, penned by Associate Justice Cipriano del Rosario, was the third whammy for the Marcoses this year.

The other two: the recent P23-billion tax case at the Supreme Court and the case involving P265 million worth of shares in the Eastern Telecommunications Philippines Inc. at the Sandiganbayan.

Rehash

The anti-graft court said Ms Marcos' appeal on Aug. 22, 1996 was merely a rehash of her previous arguments seeking to quash the five graft cases.

It said her argument was ''specious, a mental construct that has no factual or legal basis.''

The Sandiganbayan had denied Ms Marcos's earlier motions to dismiss the cases in 1993 and 1996.

On Oct. 8, 1996, the prosecution and the defense jointly moved to put the hearings on hold pending a resolution by the Supreme Court of a separate petition involving the same issues.

It was only on Feb. 4, 1998, or after two years, that the Sandiganbayan lifted its hold order on the hearings ''in view of the great lapse of time and the dim prospect of an early resolution on the petition'' before the high tribunal.

'Befuddled

The anti-graft court said Ms Marcos was ''befuddle(d)'' when she reiterated her arguments in trying to clear herself.

She claimed that as an assemblywoman, she could still manage the Marcoses' alleged dummy foundations, and stressed that the ban only applied to the Prime Minister and members of the Cabinet as stated in the 1973 Constitution, which was then in effect.

She said the 1973 Charter did not bar her from managing a business as a member of parliament, citing Section 11 Article VIII of the 1973 Constitution.

It was a virtual admission that she had indeed managed the affairs of the four dummy corporations.

Ms Marcos also claimed that the 10-year prescription period under Republic Act 3326 had lapsed when the Ombudsman filed the graft cases against her in December 1991.

But the Sandiganbayan said the charges were properly filed against her, and that all the elements of graft were explained in the criminal information filed by the Ombudsman.

BIR knows very little

On the P23.5-billion tax case, Solicitor General Ricardo Galvez yesterday said the Bureau of Internal Revenue could now collect the money by auctioning off the 30 parcels of land forfeited by the family.

But a BIR official said the bureau's collections service had no information on 20 of the properties.

He identified the 10 others, which the BIR tried in vain to auction off in 1993, as mostly subdivision lots in the Poblacion area of Tacloban City.

He confirmed that nobody submitted bids at a public auction of the 10 properties on July 5, 1993. ''They must have felt that the ownership was still doubtful,'' he said.

''These are only the properties in Tacloban. We don't know where the other properties are,'' said the official, who showed the Inquirer the transfer certificates of title on condition of anonymity.

The BIR cannot hold another public auction of the 10 forfeited lots until the Supreme Court's ruling becomes final, according to the source. He also said that the BIR had not yet appraised the current fair market value of the lots.

Ball is in BIR's court

But Galvez said: ''the ball is now in the court of the BIR. The Supreme Court's decision cannot be questioned anymore because it is already final.''

He also said that if proceeds from the sale were enough to cover the P23.5 billion worth of unpaid taxes, the Marcos heirs would not have to pay anything else.

Galvez also clarified that the high court did not directly tell the Marcoses to pay the amount, but that it merely ruled with finality on the government's action of seizing the Marcos properties to collect the taxes.

But when the Supreme Court denied with finality the Marcoses' appeal, it also upheld as final the P23.47-billion tax assessment of the BIR as ''final and unappealable.''

The amount was determined by a special tax audit team in July 1991 for the Marcoses' failure to file a written notice of the death of the late strongman, and failure to file estate tax returns and several income tax returns from 1982 to 1986.

Tacloban lots

The 10 Tacloban lots, with a total land area of 2,186.34 square meters, were seized by the BIR in 1993.

The Marcoses, who were then exiled in Honolulu, lost their right to buy back the properties on July 5, 1994, upon the expiry of a one-year redemption period under Section 16 of the Tax Code.

Without buyers, the properties were registered a month later in the government's name.

These are now registered as TCT 39899, 199 sq.m.; TCT 39900, 220 sq.m.; TCT 39908, 221 sq.m.; TCT 39907, 221 sq.m.; TCT 39906, 234 sq.m.; TCT 39905, 271 sq.m.; TCT 39904, 134.34 sq.m.; TCT 39903, 221 sq.m.; TCT 39902, 238 sq.m.; and TCT 39901, 227 sq.m.

By Donna S. Cueto and Gerald G. Lacuarta