CEBU, Philippines – The Provincial Committee on Complaints and Investigation has cleared Carcar City Mayor Nicepuro Apura of charges of grave abuse of authority and oppression filed against him by a city councilor.
In a three-page report dated January 28 to be submitted to the Provincial Board, chaired by Board Member Arleigh Jay Sitoy, it was recommended that the case be dismissed for lack of substantial evidence.
"This committee after investigation hereby recommends for the dismissal of the instant case for failure of the complainant to prove by substantial evidence the acts complained of," the committee report read, which will be tackled on Monday's board session.
The dismissed case was filed by Councilor Archilles Gantuangco last May 21, 2014, as he alleged that the mayor berated him in public and imputed groundless and unsubstantiated accusations against him.
Gantuangco also alleged that the mayor had filed criminal cases and also a petition for quo warranto. (The Rules of Court Section 66 or the quo Warranto is defined by the Supreme Court as "a person who usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises a public office, position or franchise.")
Gantuangco further alleged that Apura withheld the councilor's request for official travels.
Apura and Gantuangco belonged to opposite camps in the last May 2013 elections.
But Sitoy said apart from Gantuangco's own affidavit, the councilor "voluntarily" chose not to present any evidence to support that there was really an alleged berating in public and imputation of "groundless and unsubstantial accusations" against him.
"Apart from his own affidavit, the complainant did not present any other affidavit or any other clear and convincing evidence, which would support his claim of grave abuse of authority and oppression against the respondent," the findings of the report read.
Sitoy further stated that with non-presentation of evidence against Apura, the committee could not find substantial evidence against the mayor.
The act of filing criminal cases and a petition for quo warranto of Apura against Gantuangco, the committee said, could not be classified as grave abuse of authority and oppression.
Last Oct. 25, 2013, Apura filed a criminal complaint against Gantuangco for perjury and falsification of public documents.
The mayor claimed that Gantuangco is a US citizen, citing the councilor's marriage certificate and a Comelec certification that the commission did not receive the councilor's renunciation of his foreign citizenship.
Apura also claimed that travel records issued by the Bureau of Immigration could prove that Gantuangco continued using his US passport in going out of the country after 2013 elections.
A certification from foreign affairs department also allegedly showed that no Philippine passport has been issued to Gantuangco, said the mayor.
Gantuangco said he filed to regain his Filipino citizenship in 2012.
As to the issue of denying Gantuangco's request for travel, the committee did not see any liability on the part of the mayor.
Based on the records, Gantuangco was granted official travels in July 2013, August 2013 and September 2013 and the mayor was able to present records to show that other members of the council had been denied official travels.
"Lest the committee be misunderstood, let it be clear that acts of public humiliation, vindictiveness, abuse of authority and oppression such as unreasonable withholding of benefits or approval of official travels will not and should not be tolerated and should be penalized, however, the said allegations must be proven by substantial evidence. In this case, the complainant has failed to do so," the report read.