CEBU, Philippines – Deputy Ombudsman for the Visayas Pelagio Apostol denied having dismissed the criminal cases against former Mandaue City Mayor Thadeo Ouano and Lapu-Lapu City Mayor Arturo Radaza on their alleged involvement in the anomalous procurement of the decorative lampposts during the 12th ASEAN Summit in 2007.
Apostol said his office received four lamppost cases from the Sandiganbayan for reinvestigation and all of these were re-filed before the anti-graft court.
He said there is no truth to Ouano’s claim that he had already been cleared from the three charges.
Apostol explained that there were contracts that Ouano and Radaza have no participation in. He added that in those contracts that Ouano and Radaza claimed to have been cleared based on the supplemental resolution dated May 4 were already there even in their first resolution.
In a supplemental resolution prepared and submitted by the Office of the Visayas Ombudsman, the findings showed that former mayor Ouano did not have any participation in both contract ID number 06HO008 and contract ID number 06HO0050.
Ouano was also cleared of any participation in contract 06HO0048.
“Hindi naman talaga sila kasama doon noon paman,” Apostol said in an interview over radio station dyLA.
Assistant Ombudsman Virginia Palangca Santiago, who headed the committee that reinvestigated the lamppost cases, said they have sorted out the cases by contracts.
Unlike in their first resolution in which they lumped all the contracts and charged all those who are involved, the anti-graft office, after reinvestigation, decided to file the cases per contract.
Santiago said they found out that Radaza as well as the rest of the Lapu-Lapu City officials are only involved in contract number 06H00050.The case is now back in the first division of the Sandiganbayan.
Ouano and the rest of the Mandaue City officials on the other hand are found to have been involved in the contract number 06H0052.
On top of it another case against Ouano is already pending before the 2nd division in which he had already been arraigned.
Apostol also said that Ouano and Radaza may have thought that the Ombudsman dismissed the original cases against them for violation of section 3(g) of the Republic Act 3019 otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act because this was already revised.
According to Apostol, they revised the case into violation of section 3(e) or giving unwarranted benefit to a contractor instead of the section 3(g), which is entering into a contract grossly disadvantageous to the government.
“They are not off the hook yet,” Apostol said.
Apostol and Santiago appealed to the members of the media to be careful in reporting the controversy as this might create confusion to the public. — /NLQ (THE FREEMAN)