The Sandiganbayan has affirmed its ruling that dismissed the graft and malversation of public funds charges filed against former mayor Teddy C. Tumang of Mexico, Pampanga and seven other persons named in the alleged irregular procurement of construction materials for road repairs in 2009 and 2010.

In a resolution issued last Dec. 12, the anti-graft court denied the motion filed by the prosecution to reverse the Sept. 3 ruling that granted the demurrer to evidence filed by Tumang and his co-accused.

In its motion, the prosecution argued that the court erred in ruling that there was no sufficient evidence presented by the prosecution and that the ruling was a "gross misapprehension of facts" which are "unfounded, speculative or arbitrary."

But the Sandiganbayan stood pat on its ruling.

It said: "The Court stands firm on its findings contained in its assailed Resolution. The prosecution failed to adduce new substantive arguments to convince the Court to reconsider and set aside its findings that the prosecution did not provide sufficient and competent evidence to support a conviction."

Thus, the court said: "Having found no cogent reason to reverse its findings in the assailed resolution, the Court must perforce deny the prosecution's motion for reconsideration."

The six-page resolution was written by Presiding Justice Geraldine Faith A. Econg with the concurrence of Associate Justices Edgardo M. Caldona and Arthur O. Malabaguio.

With the grant of the demurrer to evidence, Tumang and his co-accused were cleared of 64 counts of graft and seven counts of malversation of public funds.

Also cleared and effectively acquitted were Tumang’s co-accused -- Municipal Accountant Perlita T. Lagman, Municipal Planning and Development Coordinator Marlon De Leon Maniacup, Municipal Agriculturist Romeo C. Razon, Municipal Budget Officer Lucila M. Agento, Municipal Engineer Jesus S. Punzalan, and Administrative Officer V Luz C. Bondoc, as well as private individual and Buyu Trading and Construction owner William B. Colis.

They had been accused of conspiring with one another in the purchase of base course materials intended to improve the roads in Barangay Eden, Mexico without undergoing public bidding. The prosecution alleged that the said purchases did not even reach their intended recipients, therefore causing damage and prejudice to the government.

The anti-graft court ruled that there was no sufficient evidence presented that would prove all of the elements of the crimes charged.

Also, the court ruled that the prosecution failed to present sufficient evidence to prove that the procured base course materials were not delivered to the intended barangays.

"In all, at this stage of the proceedings (at the time the demurrer of evidence was filed on alleged weakness of evidence), the prosecution has failed to discharge its burden to present sufficient evidence to support a verdict of guilt against all accused of the charges against them as alleged in the subject informations," the court said.