Ex-DA officials convicted of graft
Published Feb 25, 2020 12:00 am
By Czarina Ong Ki
The Sandiganbayan Sixth Division has found four former officials of the Department of Agriculture (DA) Regional Field Unit XI guilty beyond reasonable doubt of graft due to the irregular purchase of water system materials back in 2006.
Sandiganbayan (MANILA BULLETIN)
Regional Executive Director Roger Chio, Regional Technical Director Romulo Palcon, Finance Division Chief Alma Mahinay, and Administrative Officer V Godofredo Ramos have been convicted of violating Section 3(e) of R.A. 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and have been sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of six years and one month as minimum to eight years as maximum, with perpetual disqualification from holding public office.
The graft charge was for the awarding of the contract for water system materials amounting to P2,591,435 to PZA Trading back in 2006 without conducting pre-procurement and pre-bid conferences and despite the presence of other irregularities in the bidding process.
In its ruling, the anti-graft court said that there is no question that the special bids and awards committee (SBAC) should have conducted pre-procurement and pre-bid conferences.
However, there is nothing in the evidence on record which would show that the accused indeed conducted pre-procurement and pre-bid conferences. The anti-graft court then emphasized that the absence of this evidence does not automatically lead to the conclusion that the accused acted with evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence when they caused the award of the subject contract to PZA.
In order to prove that the contract to PZA was not justified, the prosecution needed to show that there was collusion on the part of the accused and PZA, that the SBAC failed to follow the prescribed bidding procedures, or that there were other justifiable and reasonable grounds where the contract will not redound to the benefit of the government.
The anti-graft court noted the prosecution's evidence that the amount of the bid is exactly the same as that in the Purchase Request. This is an indication of collusion, it said in its decision.
But what really pinned down the accused to the crime is the discrepancy in the amount. The PZA's bid amount of P2,591,435.40 exceeded the budget of P2,591,435.
"The difference may be minuscule, but there is no question that P2,591,435.40 is greater than P2,591,435," the decision read.
Chio, Palcon, Mahinay, and Ramos tried to argue that the SBAC Secretariat erroneously omitted the P0.40 in the Invitation to Apply for Eligibility to Bid. But the court did not buy into their reasoning and said that they should have declared a failure of bidding.
"The accused's act of awarding or causing the subject contract to PZA was unjustified and constitutes unwarranted benefits given to PZA," the decision read.
The 24-page decision was penned by Sixth Division Chairperson Sarah Jane Fernandez with the concurrences of Associate Justices Karl Miranda and Kevin Narce Vivero.
Meanwhile, the case against Chief Agriculturist Jaime Bergonio, another co-accused, has been archived pending his arrest.
Sandiganbayan (MANILA BULLETIN)
Regional Executive Director Roger Chio, Regional Technical Director Romulo Palcon, Finance Division Chief Alma Mahinay, and Administrative Officer V Godofredo Ramos have been convicted of violating Section 3(e) of R.A. 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and have been sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of six years and one month as minimum to eight years as maximum, with perpetual disqualification from holding public office.
The graft charge was for the awarding of the contract for water system materials amounting to P2,591,435 to PZA Trading back in 2006 without conducting pre-procurement and pre-bid conferences and despite the presence of other irregularities in the bidding process.
In its ruling, the anti-graft court said that there is no question that the special bids and awards committee (SBAC) should have conducted pre-procurement and pre-bid conferences.
However, there is nothing in the evidence on record which would show that the accused indeed conducted pre-procurement and pre-bid conferences. The anti-graft court then emphasized that the absence of this evidence does not automatically lead to the conclusion that the accused acted with evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence when they caused the award of the subject contract to PZA.
In order to prove that the contract to PZA was not justified, the prosecution needed to show that there was collusion on the part of the accused and PZA, that the SBAC failed to follow the prescribed bidding procedures, or that there were other justifiable and reasonable grounds where the contract will not redound to the benefit of the government.
The anti-graft court noted the prosecution's evidence that the amount of the bid is exactly the same as that in the Purchase Request. This is an indication of collusion, it said in its decision.
But what really pinned down the accused to the crime is the discrepancy in the amount. The PZA's bid amount of P2,591,435.40 exceeded the budget of P2,591,435.
"The difference may be minuscule, but there is no question that P2,591,435.40 is greater than P2,591,435," the decision read.
Chio, Palcon, Mahinay, and Ramos tried to argue that the SBAC Secretariat erroneously omitted the P0.40 in the Invitation to Apply for Eligibility to Bid. But the court did not buy into their reasoning and said that they should have declared a failure of bidding.
"The accused's act of awarding or causing the subject contract to PZA was unjustified and constitutes unwarranted benefits given to PZA," the decision read.
The 24-page decision was penned by Sixth Division Chairperson Sarah Jane Fernandez with the concurrences of Associate Justices Karl Miranda and Kevin Narce Vivero.
Meanwhile, the case against Chief Agriculturist Jaime Bergonio, another co-accused, has been archived pending his arrest.