The Presidential Anti-Graft Commission will finish its investigation into the administrative case filed against the officials of the Public Estates Authority (PEA) by Dec. 7, PAGC chairman Dario Rama said yesterday.
Rama made his statement following the first and only hearing on the case yesterday at the PAGC office on Commonwealth Avenue in Quezon City.
The PAGC has denied the motion filed by PEA board member Sulficio Tagud, one of the accused in the administrative case, to transfer his case to the Office of the Ombudsman.
Rama said the Ombudsman has given the PAGC permission to conduct its investigation on Tagud, the whistle-blower in the PEA case.
Tagud blew the whistle on the alleged P600 million overpricing of the P1.2 billion President Diosdado Macapagal Boulevard (PDMB) in Pasay City’s reclamation area and filed graft charges against 16 PEA officials and a private contractor before the Commission on Audit (COA) and the Office of the Ombudsman.
Rama also said the proceeding against Tagud is administrative in nature. "This case (only requires) one hearing, because it’s purely documentary (so) there is no need for testimonies like in a criminal case," Rama added.
In a seven-page formal charge, the PAGC’s Investigation Office accused the PEA board, among others, of violating Republic Act 3019, otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Item IB2 on the Organization of the Prequalification, Bid and Award Committee (PBAC) of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of Presidential Decree No. 1594 and the construction agreement forged between PEA and contractor J.D. Legaspi Construction (JDLC)on the PDMB.
Included in the charge sheet were PEA board of directors chairman Ernesto Villareal; general manager Benjamin Cariño and board members Joemari Gerochi, Martin Sanciego, Rodolfo Tuazon, Angelito Villanueva and Tagud, deputy general managers Manuel Berina Jr., Theron Lacson and Bernardo Viray. Also in the charge sheet were PEA senior corporate attorney Ernesto Enriquez, assistant general manager Jaime Millan and several John and Jane Does, who are presidential appointees-employees or non-presidential appointees and non-career employees of PEA.
The PAGC gave the 12 PEA officials until Nov. 26 to file their position papers that would support the verified answers to the complaint, which they submitted to the PAGC yesterday.
Tagud said he was "surprised" he was included in the charge sheet. "I don’t feel good about it because I was the one who brought about this issue, but, I guess... we just have to play by the rules of the PAGC."
Tagud said he did not file his complaint affidavit with the PAGC, as he was advised by his lawyers that he could be charged with forum shopping because he previously filed a case before the Ombudsman on the same matter.
The PAGC was waiting for Tagud’s affidavit, which it intends to attach to documents on the administrative case against the PEA officials. Tagud could also have been a private complainant in the case, Rama said.
The PAGC has acted as the nominal complainant in this case, in the absence of a private complainant.
Rama said the PAGC, as an anti-graft office, is allowed to stand as nominal complaint in the case. The PAGC is also empowered to file charges against the accused, even if it will conduct the investigation and render its recommendations on the same case.
As an anti-graft office, Rama said, the PAGC can also act on anonymous tips, provided these tips are backed with evidence.
The PEA officials charged by the PAGC violated the construction agreement when "all additional works ... were performed/executed and completed without (having) the necessary condition of the President’s approval," Rama said.
PEA allegedly approved the additional contract price adjustment with JDLC of P42,418,493.64; the updated cost of Variation Order No. 2 of P126,440,810.20 and Variation Order No. 4 worth P4,759,630.8 for Additional Items of Work and P79,332,524.08 for the Final Bill of Quantities.
"The respondents’ obvious criminal intent to cause damage to government is manifested by the fact that the original contract price of P584,365,885.05 is way beyond the official estimate of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) on the cost per square meter and/or linear meter for road and bridge construction which was furnished the commission," PAGC officer-in-charge and Investigation Office director Imelda Dagnoy said in the formal charge.
"PEA authorized payment and has actually paid (JDLC) a total amount of P816,006,251.93 as of Aug. 31, 2002," Dagnoy added.
The PAGC also said PEA’s creation of an ad hoc committee responsible for the bidding and award of the construction contract instead of a PBAC was a violation of the law.
PD 1594 provides that "each office/agency/corporation shall have in its head office or in its implementing offices a (PBAC) which shall be responsible for the conduct of prequalification, bidding, evaluation of bids and recommending award of contracts."
The same law said the "government-owned or controlled corporation shall organize their own PABCs, the members of which shall be appointed by their respective boards, preferably along the same line as other government offices."
The PEA ad hoc committee created in lieu of a PBAC was composed of Berina, as chairman; with Lacson, Viray and Enriquez as members.
The PABC should consist of a regular chairman, executive officer and secretary and member; two provisional members and members from the private sector.