Criminal probe vs Caindec now up to Ombuds Visayas

CEBU, Philippines —  Following the dismissal of the cyberlibel cases filed by Land Transportation Office (LTO)-7 Director Victor Emmanuel C. Caindec against motorcycle dealers by the Mandaue City Prosecutors’ office for lack of probable cause, the Central Records Division of the Office of the Ombudsman has indorsed to the Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas the cases filed by the motorcycle dealers against Caindec.

In separate endorsements dated March 18, 2022 and April 4, 2022, the officer-in-charge of the Central Records Division of the Office of the Ombudsman, Caroline A. De Leon, forwarded to Office of the Ombudsman for the Visayas the original records of the cases entitled Des Marketing, Inc. vs. Victor Emmanuel C. Caindec, et al. and Du Ek Sam, Inc. vs. Victor Emmanuel C. Caindec, et al., docketed as IC-OC-21-0510 and IC-OC-21-0511, respectively. Both are criminal cases.

The criminal cases against Caindec by the motorcycle dealers and the cyberlibel cases filed by him stemmed from the delays in the registration of the motorcycle units sold by the dealers as well as the accreditation of the branches of the dealers after the dealers claimed to have refused the “SOP” being demanded by Caindec.

 While Caindec denied demanding SOPs, the dealers suffered months of delays in the registration of the motorcycles sold by them to the damage and prejudice of their customers.

These criminal cases are the latest against Caindec filed with the Ombudsman. In June last year, the Anti-Red Tape Authority “recommended that Caindec be held liable for violation of Section 21, paragraphs (a), (b), and 75 counts of paragraph (e) of Republic Act No. 11032 or the Ease of Doing Business and Efficient Government Service Delivery Act of 2018.”

The ARTA asked the Ombudsman to preventively suspend Caindec. There is no news yet on the latest on the ARTA case. Arising from the same case where ARTA filed a criminal complaint against Caindec before the Ombudsman, ARTA likewise recommended to the Presidential Anti-Corruption Commission for “further investigation” of Caindec “for possible violation of Republic Act No. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act”.  — FPL (FREEMAN)