Sandiganbayan finds Sajid Ampatuan, budget officer guilty of graft, malversation

The Sandiganbayan has found former Maguindanao governor Sajid Ampatuan and ex-Maguindanao budget officer Datuali Abpi guilty of graft and malversation of public funds over the anomalous 2009 purchase of P16.3 million food supplies.

In a 75-page decision dated May 5, the anti-graft court said the supplier of the P16.3 million food supplies, identified as Henry Merchandising, does not exist, and that the P16.3 million purchases subject of the cases were done under following circumstances:

• made under negotiated procurement without justifiable reason and supporting documents; and
• were not supported by a Resolution from the Sangguniang Panlalawigan declaring a state of local emergency or calamity in Maguindanao or any Certifications of Emergency Purchase.

As a result, the Sandiganbayan sentenced Ampatuan and Abpi to six to 10 years in prison each for the graft conviction, on top of perpetual disqualification from public office.

The anti-graft court also meted an additional 10- to 17-year jail time each to Ampatuan and Abpi for their malversation of public funds conviction and ordered them to pay the government the malversed amount of P16.3 million with interest computed from the finality of the decision until paid.

“The accused conspired with each other to make it appear that: Henry Merchandising was a qualified supplier of various food supplies; it delivered such goods to the province; and the province disbursed public funds to pay for such goods. In truth, no such deliveries were made since Henry Merchandising did not exist as an entity,” the Sandiganbayan said.

Ampatuan, in his defense, cited a memorandum he issued stating signatures appearing over his name on the disbursement vouchers were either stamped  or computer-generated.

The Sandiganbayan, however, countered that Ampatuan did not categorically deny that such signatures were his.

“He merely asserted that they were not his original, handwritten signatures. Moreover, a careful review of all the DVs (disbursement vouchers) would show that the vouchers are substantially infirm given the following circumstances: the lack of required supporting documentation; the fact that the indicated payee is a fictitious, or at the very least highly questionable, entity; and  the lack of entries relating to necessary details,” the anti-graft court said.

“As OlC-Governor of the province, it was accused Sajid's job and responsibility to make sure that public funds of the province were disbursed properly. This Court is convinced that he failed to do so, and with such omission, he acted with evident bad faith, manifest partiality and/or gross inexcusable negligence in the performance of his duties,” the Sandiganbayan added.

Even on the assumption that Ampatuan’s signatures were indeed stamped  or computer-generated, the anti-graft court said such situation demonstrates serious neglect of his official duties as both the head of the procuring entity and the local chief executive.

“Accused Sajid did not dispute that funds were released and purportedly paid to Henry Merchandising by virtue of said DVs. Thus, rather than serving as evidence of his innocence, his lack of signature thereon means that he was grossly remiss in his duties to safeguard the Province’s funds,” the Sandiganbayan said.

“For a series of unscrupulous transaction to take place under accused Sajid’s watch, involving millions of public funds disbursed with the imprimatur of his office, and failing to exercise what is due of his official functions amounts to no other than gross inexcusable negligence,” it added.

Ultimately, the anti-graft court said Ampatuan did not present any other documentary evidence that  could give a semblance of legitimacy to these transactions and failed to prove that the signatures appearing on the  subject vouchers are not his.

“Forgery as a defense must be proven by clear and convincing evidence, and the burden of proof lies on the party  alleging forgery,” the Sandiganbayan said.

In the case of Abpi, the Sandiganbayan said he did not bother to present  testimonial or documentary evidence in his defense.

“Thus, he (Abpi) failed to controvert the allegation that they caused an award to a company that does not, in fact, exist. Accused Abpi's act of signing the Abstracts of Bids, coupled with the circumstances discussed above, to the conclusion that he consented to all such transactions with evident bad faith,” the anti-graft court said.

“The prosecution’s evidence sufficiently proved the unity of purpose among the accused to accomplish the misappropriation of a total of PhP16,317,559.00 in public funds. As such, even if accused Abpi did not have a direct hand in the release of public funds per se, his complicity to the entire scheme, and commission of necessary acts in the furtherance thereof, particularly makes him equally liable with accused Ampatuan,” the anti-graft court added. —KG, GMA Integrated News