Ombudsman junks graft charges vs DPWH execs

MANILA, Philippines - Citing insufficient evidence, the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon has recommended the dismissal of graft charges against Region 4-B (Mimaropa) officials of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) over infrastructure projects costing P420 million five years ago.

Graft probers said there were not enough basis to proceed with the filing of criminal and administrative cases against the respondents and the private contractors who were also implicated in the alleged irregularities.

Among those cleared were DPWH-Region 4 engineers Ramon Camacho Jr. of the Palawan 2nd Engineering Office; Nestor de la Cruz, then the assistant district engineer; Mario Soriano, then the construction section chief; and Rody Angulo, maintenance section chief.

The graft charges against Ma. Fe Cayao, engineer II; Francisco Dacasin, then the planning section chief; Dominador Alonzabe of the materials testing and quality control section; Eddie Uy, head of the Bids and Awards Committee-Technical Working Group; administrative officer Lorenzo Rodriguez; and resident auditor Maximo Montealegre were also junked.

Also cleared were private respondents Josephine de la Fuente of Ivy Michelle Construction, Nirmla de Guzman of Chrishelle Construction, Armandro Lustre Jr. of A.R. Lustre Jr. Construction, Arnulfo Gonzaga of Orani Builders, Rosanno Tagala of R.C. Tagala Construction, Bella Tiotangco of BCT Trading and Construction, Bonifacio Carlos of BM Carlos Construction and E.D. Tabangay Construction, Jesus Tan, and Ulysses Consebido of Seven Digit Construction Supply.      

The charges against them stemmed from a complaint filed by Jose Antonio Socrates in 2009 over the use of public funds from the Malampaya gas project.

In an 81-page ruling, the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon said the charges against the DPWH officials were being junked based on the recommendations of graft and investigation officer II Irmina Bautista and Zero Backlog Unit Evaluation and Investigation Office head Margie Fernandez-Calpatura.

The Ombudsman investigators said there was no evidentiary basis to Socrates’ allegations that the contracts were revised as to scope and plans without justified authorization and that there were irregularities in the bidding process.

“From the case records, we note that the accusations are purely based on complainant’s observations and personal computations. There is no clear showing that complainant is an expert on the matter and that he based his observations and computations on actual inspection of the projects,” read the decision approved by Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales.