MANILA, Philippines - Graft charges were filed against six police officers, some of them senior in rank, for alleged involvement in the anomalous procurement of 16 defective coastal craft worth P5 million.
Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) chief Director Samuel Pagdilao Jr. yesterday said the charges filed against the six police officers are separate from the P131-million case on the questionable procurement of 75 police rubber boats and outboard motors.
The CIDG report on the procurement of the rubber boats had been submitted to Interior Secretary Jesse Robredo for review.
The National Capital Region Office of the CIDG filed charges of violation of the anti-graft law and corrupt practices acts against the six police officers before the Office of the Ombudsman last Sept. 22.
Charged were Senior Superintendent Job Marasigan, Superintendent Leodigario Visaya, Chief Inspector Juanito Estrebor, Chief Inspector Renalfa Saculles, all members of the Inspection and Acceptance Committee (IAC) of the PNP LSS; Superintendent Henry Duque and Police Officer 3 Avensuel Dy, both members of the Management Division Office.
“This irregularity could have been avoided if the police officers had been diligent and had been more circumspect and had they not usurped the authority of the PNP-MG (Philippine National Police-Maritime Group) to inspect and accept the 16 units of PCC,” Pagdilao said in a statement.
CIDG-NCR chief Senior Superintendent Joel Coronel said the police officers denied the charges.
“Based on our investigation, they (police officers) acted without authority in inspecting and accepting the coastal craft.
They claimed they believed it as part of their responsibility, but to investigators, they have no basis,” Coronel said.
They were also charged with usurpation of authority; and violation of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, and the Government Procurement Act.
On Sept. 1, 2009, the PNP-MG was authorized by the PNP Bids and Awards Committee to procure through public bidding 16 units of coastal craft for an approved amount of P5 million.
On Nov. 27, 2009, Four Petals Trading owned by Pacita Umali got the contract amounting to P4,799,984.00, which was signed a month later. The units were delivered on March 22, 2010.
Upon inspection of the units, it was discovered that some were defective and in need of immediate repairs. All were also diesel, instead of gasoline, fed.
On separate occasions – Aug. 23, Sept. 3, and Oct. 18, all in 2010 – the MG instructed the supplier to repair and repaint the coastal craft before the PNP formally accept the units. On Feb. 22, 2011, the MG demanded that the supplier comply with the request to repair the defects within 15 days but Four Petals Trading ignored the request.
MG director Chief Superintendent Francisco Don Montenegro then sent a notice of termination of the contract to the supplier for non-performance of obligation.
CIDG investigators later found out that the four accused who are members of the IAC-LSS had conducted the inspection as early as July 2010 without the knowledge of the MG and accepted the defective units despite the complaints and non-acceptance of the MG.
It turns out that the only authorized entity to accept the units is the Maritime Group.
It was also found out that based on the IAC-LSS report attached to the disbursement voucher, the Accounting Division processed for the issuance of payment in the amount of P4,542,824.00 to the supplier.
“The premature or untimely payment of the 16 units of PCC before the PNP-MG formally accepted the units is anomalous because it caused a great loss to the government and to the public, considering that the items that had been prematurely and illegally paid cannot be put to good use,” the report said.
The report said that legal action, which entails unnecessary expenses, had to be initiated by the PNP to protect its interest and recover the amount paid to Four Petals Trading.
The report added that inspection report made by PO3 Dy and noted by Supt. Duque established a high level of suspicion that they had not observed due diligence and in fact conspired with IAC-LSS officials in the acceptance and premature payment of the defective units.