Ex-Ilocos Sur mayor acquitted of graft, malversation

The Sandiganbayan has acquitted a former mayor of Cabugao, Ilocos Sur and two others of graft and malversation charges in connection to a farm-to-market road project in 2010.

In a 74-page decision promulgated on October 28, the anti-graft court cleared former municipal mayor Diocaesar Suero of violation of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, as amended, and the crime of malversation of public funds.

Also cleared were then municipal planning and development coordinator Florante Jara and private contractor Nestor Ibarra of the N.A. Ibarra Construction.

“The Court is not convinced that accused Suero and Ibarra committed evident bad faith, manifest partiality, or gross inexcusable negligence in the act imputed in the information,” the Sandiganbayan said.

The court ordered the bail bonds posted as well as the hold departure order issued against them to be released.

Meanwhile, the Sandiganbayan ordered the case against then-municipal engineer Jose Suboc to be archived until he is brought within the jurisdiction of the court.

The case stemmed from a complaint alleging that Suero acted with evident bad faith and gross negligence and conspired with other officials in paying Ibarra even though the project was not complete by 74.79 cubic meters amounting to P516,715.

However, the court said the prosecution was unable to prove that the project was not finished 100% and that it cannot be concluded that the certifications issued by the officials are false.

It said that engineer Pedro Blanco, a COA auditor who wrote the inspection report, did not establish how he was able to compute the number of cubic meters that was completed.

Further, the Sandiganbayan said that Blanco had inspected one site that was pointed to him by the project monitoring team. The defense, however, said that the project consisted of four sites or components.

“The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they issued them in order to favor one party nor was there proof of ill motive or patently dishonest and fraudulent purpose or with conscious indifference on the part of the accused in certifying that the project was 100% complete as of April 5, 2010,” it said.

Further, it said the charge of conspiracy is not substantiated by evidence, much less proved beyond reasonable doubt.

“The Court cannot assume that conspiracy exists just because it was alleged in the information. The prosecution, other than its bare assertion that the accused conspired with one another, failed to prove that there was a conscious criminal design existing among them,” it said.—AOL, GMA News