Ten DPWH officials cleared of graft raps

CEBU, Philippines - The anti-graft office dismissed the administrative and criminal case filed by Crisologo Saavedra against 10 officials of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH)-7.

The 10 respondents were Regional Director Roberto Lala; Assistant Regional Director Marlina Alvizo; Planning and Design Division Chief Luis Galang; Construction Division Chief Buenaventure Pajo; Administrative Division Chief Restituto Diano; legal officers Agustinito Hermoso and Ayaon Manggis, Controller and Financial Management Chief Teresa Bernido and Engrs. Cresencio Bacolor and Marilyn Ojeda.

Graft investigator Corazon Carillo found no probable cause to indict the 10 for grave misconduct and violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

“The case is hereby dismissed for lack of merit. The cancellation of the contract was not anomalous,” Carillo stated.

Saavedra, project manager of the Pelican Bay Group Inc. or Cebesos Development Corp, filed the case over what he said was the illegal cancellation of his contract with the DPWH in relation to the supply, delivery, installation, testing and commissioning of traffic surveillance equipment.

He said they won the bidding to supply and install the cameras in the cities of Mandaue, Cebu and Lapu-Lapu for the 12th ASEAN Summit on 2006.

Saavedra said the DPWH issued a notice of award to their company, having offered P79,880,000.

The DPWH said the supply and delivery of materials for the traffic surveillance equipment shall be made on or before November 20, 2006 as the ASEAN Summit was scheduled on December 10-14, 2006.

However, the Pelican Bay Group Inc. failed to comply with the date set so the DPWH got the services of the Triton Communication Corp.

Saavedra complained that declaring the award to Triton Communication Corp. was anomalous as the offer was “defective and non-complying.”

However, after a careful evaluation, Carillo found nothing anomalous in hiring the services of Triton Communication Corp.

The DPWH had countered that the Pelican Bay Group Inc., through Saavedra, had shown signs of not meeting the terms and conditions set in the Notice of Award because Saavedra was starting to question these, which he had previously agreed to comply with.  (FREEMAN)