The Sandiganbayan Seventh Division has dismissed three graft charges against five members of the Cebu City Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) after the prosecution failed to prove their involvement in the alleged anomaly. In a resolution, the anti-graft court granted the motion to quash filed by Dominic Diño, Janeses Ponce, Leizl Calamba, Conrado Ordesta III, and Lyndon Bernardo Basan, who were accused of violating Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019, also known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
Background of the Case
The case stemmed from the awarding of multi-million-peso contracts for solid waste management in 2021 to three private companies: Jomara Konstruckt Corp., ACM Hauling Services, and ARN Central Waste Management Inc. According to the prosecution, these contracts caused undue harm to the government and provided unwarranted benefits to the private contractors.
However, the case was dismissed after the court approved the defense's motions to quash—a legal step taken before trial when the criminal information is found to be defective.
Court Ruling
The Sandiganbayan found that the prosecution relied heavily on listing alleged violations of administrative procurement rules instead of proving criminal intent. The court clarified that errors in government procurement procedures do not automatically constitute a criminal violation under RA 3019.
During the hearing, the defense successfully argued that procurement guidelines are designed to govern administrative processes and are not penal laws. They also asserted that the prosecution's allegations lacked clear legal conclusions.
The prosecution, on the other hand, argued that detailed evidence was not necessary at the initial stage of filing the case, claiming that the violated procurement rules demonstrated the method of the alleged graft and were sufficient to show damage to the government and undue benefit to the contractors.
Constitutional Requirement
The Sandiganbayan rejected the prosecution's stance, stating that it failed to meet the constitutional requirement of clearly informing the accused of the nature and cause of the crime they face. The court reminded that any ambiguity or deficiency in a criminal case must favor the accused, in line with the principle of presumption of innocence.
“While the amended Informations mentioned the elements of violation of Section 3(e) of RA 3019, the prosecution failed to explicitly indicate the acts and facts how the accused committed the offenses charged,” the resolution stated, as penned by Associate Justice Pahimna.
Editor's Note: An earlier version of this article erroneously reported that the Sandiganbayan dismissed a graft case against former Cebu City mayor Michael Rama. This error has been corrected.
