Ombudsman confirms dismissal of complaints vs Dizon over 2019 SEA Games sports facilities
By Jel Santos
At A Glance
- Earlier, Malacañang said Dizon had already been cleared over the issue following an investigation.
(MB FILE PHOTO)
The Office of the Ombudsman (OMB) has confirmed that the criminal and administrative complaints filed against current Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Secretary Vince Dizon over the construction of sports facilities for the 2019 Southeast Asian (SEA) Games have already been dismissed due to insufficient evidence.
Earlier, Malacañang said Dizon had already been cleared over the issue following an investigation.
On Thursday, July 16, Assistant Ombudsman Jose Dominic “Mico” Clavano IV said the graft and malversation complaints filed by Citizens Crime Watch (CCW) against Dizon and three others in October 2020 were already resolved.
“Upon checking the records of this case, it appears that the case filed against Sec. Vince Dizon, etc. regarding the construction of the sports facilities for the 2019 SEA Games has been dismissed for insufficiency of evidence. This is contained in a joint resolution issued back in December, 2021,” Clavano told reporters covering the OMB.
Aside from Dizon, the other respondents were BCDA senior vice president for legal services Elvira Estanislao, Office of the Government Corporate Counsel (OGCC) lawyer Elpidio Vega, and Isaac David, director and representative of Malaysian construction firm MTD Capital Berhad for the SEA Games facilities at New Clark City in Tarlac.
In its complaint, the CCW alleged that Dizon and the three other respondents were liable for violations of Republic Act No. 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, and for malversation of public funds under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code.
The complaint alleged that the three public officials conspired in awarding MTD Capital Berhad a P8.51-billion joint venture agreement (JVA) for the construction of the sports facilities despite what it described as several irregularities, including the lack of public bidding, the absence of budget appropriation, and unauthorized “insertions and modifications” to the original contract.