Sandiganbayan dismisses graft case vs. ex-DFA Usec Lauro Baja

The Sandiganbayan has dismissed the graft case against former Foreign Affairs Undersecretary Lauro Baja Jr. in connection with the alleged non-existent representation expenses he reimbursed as permanent Philippine representative to the United Nations.

In its 35-page resolution, the anti-graft court's Special Fifth Division granted Baja's demurrer to evidence and dismissed the case for "insufficiency of evidence."

Bajo was accused of "willfully, unlawfully, and criminally" claiming and receiving his reimbursement for "non-existent or fictitious" representation expenses with an overall total of $28,934.96 from the Department of Foreign Affairs from 2003 to 2005 without proper documentation.

In dismissing the case, the court said the irregularities observed by the Commission on Audit (COA) and the fact-finding team from the Department of Foreign Affairs are insufficient in establishing that Baja sought reimbursements for "non-existent" representation expenses.

The COA auditors found that:

• Checks issued to support the claim for reimbursement of amounts to waiters does not show presentment to the banks;
• Payment made for the services of waiters is supported by temporary receipt only;
• Only the photocopy of the check was submitted;
• Purpose of the expenses are not indicated in the request for reimbursements;
• Only temporary receipts were issued; and
• Receipts submitted do not contain the name of the payee

Meanwhile, the DFA fact-finding team has found that:

• Temporary receipts are attached to the reimbursement requests;
• Checks to support proof of payment for reimbursement are mere photocopies; and
• The amount stated in the receipt is unusually high and the handwriting is unrecognizable

The court said the prosecution should have showed another evidence proving that the checks issued by Baja were never paid to the waiters, caterers of restaurants.

"The mere fact that the checks submitted as proof of payment do not show that they were honored and paid for does not mean that the same were not paid," the court said in its resolution.

The DFA fact-finding team should also have made further investigations and inquiries in determining if the payments or expenses Baja wanted to be reimbursed were actually made, the court said.

"This Court gives it to the prosecution that there was, indeed, improper documentation of reimbursement of expenses. Unfortunately, it could not lead to a conclusion that these documents, even if improper, are evidence of non-existent or fictitious transactions," the resolution read. — RSJ, GMA News