Sandiganbayan affirms suspension of Cebu vice mayor
Published Jan 23, 2019 02:56 pm
By Czarina Nicole Ong
The Sandiganbayan Seventh Division has affirmed the 90-day suspension of Carcar Vice Mayor Mario Patricio Paraz Barcenas due to his pending graft charge in relation to the fertilizer fund scam back in 2011.
(MANILA BULLETIN)
Barcenas was accused of violating Section 3(e) of R.A. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act due to his reported involvement in the questionable purchase of 166 liters/bottles of foliar fertilizers through direct contracting during his term as the mayor of Carcar. The purchase was made from M.M. Castillo General Merchandise.
On October 15, 2018, the anti-graft court issued a resolution suspending him from office for a period of 90 days.
Barcenas filed a motion for reconsideration and begged the court to take a "second hard look" at the circumstances of the case. He cited an editorial article dated December 14, 2016 and attempted to connect the facts of his case to the fertilizer fund scam principally invoking former Agriculture Secretary Jocelyn “Jocjoc” Bolante.
The prosecution argued otherwise, saying that his arguments are "off-tangent" to the issue of preventive suspension. At the same time, his motion was belatedly filed on January 8, 2019.
The anti-graft court agreed with the prosecution, since Barcenas should have filed his motion for reconsideration on November 14, 2018. For this delay alone, the court said his motion should already be struck down.
But even if he had filed his MR on a timely manner, the court said the same results will be yielded. The Sandiganbayan ruled that Section 13 of R.A. 3019 is "crystal clear."
"It is mandatory for this court to suspend any public officer against whom valid information is filed charging a violation of said law...or for any offense involving fraud upon government or public funds or property," the resolution read.
"It bears reiterating that this court possesses no discretion to determine whether a preventive suspension is necessary to forestall the possibility that the accused may use his or her public office to intimidate witnesses, or frustrate his or her prosecution, continue committing malfeasance, or do both," it added.
The three-page resolution was penned by Chairperson Ma. Theresa Dolores Gomez-Estoesta. It was concurred by Associate Justices Zaldy Trespeses and Bayani Jacinto
(MANILA BULLETIN)
Barcenas was accused of violating Section 3(e) of R.A. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act due to his reported involvement in the questionable purchase of 166 liters/bottles of foliar fertilizers through direct contracting during his term as the mayor of Carcar. The purchase was made from M.M. Castillo General Merchandise.
On October 15, 2018, the anti-graft court issued a resolution suspending him from office for a period of 90 days.
Barcenas filed a motion for reconsideration and begged the court to take a "second hard look" at the circumstances of the case. He cited an editorial article dated December 14, 2016 and attempted to connect the facts of his case to the fertilizer fund scam principally invoking former Agriculture Secretary Jocelyn “Jocjoc” Bolante.
The prosecution argued otherwise, saying that his arguments are "off-tangent" to the issue of preventive suspension. At the same time, his motion was belatedly filed on January 8, 2019.
The anti-graft court agreed with the prosecution, since Barcenas should have filed his motion for reconsideration on November 14, 2018. For this delay alone, the court said his motion should already be struck down.
But even if he had filed his MR on a timely manner, the court said the same results will be yielded. The Sandiganbayan ruled that Section 13 of R.A. 3019 is "crystal clear."
"It is mandatory for this court to suspend any public officer against whom valid information is filed charging a violation of said law...or for any offense involving fraud upon government or public funds or property," the resolution read.
"It bears reiterating that this court possesses no discretion to determine whether a preventive suspension is necessary to forestall the possibility that the accused may use his or her public office to intimidate witnesses, or frustrate his or her prosecution, continue committing malfeasance, or do both," it added.
The three-page resolution was penned by Chairperson Ma. Theresa Dolores Gomez-Estoesta. It was concurred by Associate Justices Zaldy Trespeses and Bayani Jacinto