The Sandiganbayan has denied the motions of former mayor Isabelo J. Maquino of Santa Barbara town in Iloilo and five other persons to challenge the alleged weakness of the prosecution’s evidence to sustain their conviction in the criminal charges filed against them.

In a resolution, the anti-graft court junked the plea to file a demurrer to evidence.  With the denial, the trial of the cases against the accused will proceed with the presentation of their evidence to rebut the charges.

A demurrer to evidence is a pleading filed by an accused who challenges the alleged weakness of the prosecution’s evidence to sustain a conviction. The filing of the pleading needs approval by the court.

Maquino, municipal administrator and Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) chairman Lyndofer Beup, BAC vice chairman Noel Jaspe, BAC member Ma. Negenia Areneta, and private individuals Raymund Tabuga and Felix Gurrea, were charged with violations of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, and Section 65(b)(3) of RA 9184, the Government Procurement Reform Act.

They were accused of irregularly awarding five infrastructure projects of the municipality in July 2006 to Tabuga, president of Topmost Development and Marketing Corporation (TDMC) and Gurrea, president of F. Gurrea Construction Inc. (FGCI).

The prosecution said the concreting of Libertad and Arroyo Streets were awarded to TDMC, while the asphalt overlaying of Castilla Street went to FGCI. Concreting of Sodusta Street and the construction of Fish Section Building went to TDMC. On the other hand, asphalting of Arroyo Street went to FGCI.

In filing the cases before the Sandiganbayan, the prosecution said that TDMC and FCGI, which are sister companies, were the sole bidders for the projects because of the actions of the local officials. As a result, they were given unwarranted benefits and advantage, to the damage of Santa Barbara, it said.

In their motions, the accused argued that the prosecution failed to prove all the allegations in the charge sheets filed against them. Even with the admission of all of their evidence, the accused said that the prosecution failed to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt, they claimed.

However, the anti-graft court found their motions lacking. It said: "Accused herein palpably failed to specify the grounds for their respective motions for leave to file demurrer to evidence. The accused invariably only made general assertions in their motions to the effect that the prosecution still failed to prove the allegations in the Informations (criminal charge sheets) despite the admission of certain prosecution evidence.”

"Evidently then, the accused's motions must be denied," ruled the court in a resolution written by Associate Justice Zaldy V. Trespeses with the concurrence of Associate Justices Ma. Theresa Dolores C. Gomez-Estoesta and Bayani H. Jacinto.