CEBU, Philippines - The Sandiganbayan has retained the graft case against a former Department of Agriculture-7 official who was tagged in an alleged anomalous agricultural development project funded through the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) amounting to P6 million.
The anti-graft court denied the motion for reinvestigation filed by former DA-7 executive director Eduardo Lecciones but reduced his bail from P30,000 to P15,000.
Lecciones was charged along with Antonio Yapha Jr. and Antonio Cuenco, former Cebu Third District and Cebu City South District congressmen, respectively, for allegedly endorsing an unqualified non-government organization to undertake a government project using the congressmen’s combined PDAF.
In the motion he filed, Lecciones claims that he was not afforded the fair opportunity to participate in the preliminary investigation of the cases before the Office of the Ombudsman.
But the Sandiganbayan ruled that the prosecution satisfactorily showed through evidence that it had given such opportunity to Lecciones.
The court noted Lecciones did not deny the existence of the return card and registry receipt which shows the receipt of the order by the respondent for filing of counter-affidavit.
Lecciones argued that when the subject order was sent and received at the address in Dumaguete, he was no longer residing there. He also executed an affidavit attesting to where he was residing at that time.
But the court said this affidavit has no support or corroboration aside from Lecciones’ own statement.
“As long as efforts to reach a respondent were made, and he was given an opportunity to present countervailing evidence, the preliminary instigation remains valid. Accused Lecciones was given the chance to present his side when he was served with the order to file his counter-affidavit,” the Sandiganbayan resolution read.
The Sandiganbayan earlier dismissed the cases against Cuenco and Yapha, because the Ombudsman violated their rights to due process and speedy disposition of cases for failing to resolve the criminal complaints against them within reasonable time.
The Sandiganbayan noted that there was over 10 years and six months delay in the resolution of the complaint in the Ombudsman level, a prosecution arm of the government.
The period was counted from the start of the fact-finding investigation of the Office of the Ombudsman on 17 February 2006 up to the filing of the case with the Sandiganbayan on August 24, 2016.
“The accused (Yapha and Cuenco) correctly point out that the prosecution has not sufficiently explained the delay in these cases. There is no explanation to justify the length of time it took the Office of the Ombudsman's conduct of its fact-finding investigation and even its conduct of the preliminary investigation,” read part of the Sandiganbayan’s resolution.
“The Court also takes note of the fact that the case is not complex. The issues and facts that the Office of the Ombudsman had to consider were not too difficult as to justify the length of time it took to investigate and resolve,” it added.
The case against them stemmed from the agricultural projects of the congressmen involving the purchase of 4,000 bottles of liquid fertilizers in 2005.
Yapha and Cuenco endorsed Kasosyo Foundation, Inc. to implement their projects funded out of their PDAF. Over 60 percent of the P9-million fertilizer fund was funneled through the foundation for the congressional districts of Yapha and Cuenco.
Using the pork barrel funds, Kasosyo then bought 4,000 bottles of liquid fertilizers at 1,500 per bottle, for a total project cost of P6 million. But the services of the foundation were unilaterally engaged allegedly without a required public bidding and despite the NGO's lack of experience.
"Despite Kasosyo's failure to comply with the legal requirements, respondents Cuenco and Yapha unequivocally endorsed said NGO without providing any reason or justification for their choice and without first ascertaining if the latter was eligible or qualified," the Ombudsman said. (FREEMAN)