MANILA, Philippines — The Sandiganbayan has convicted four former officials of the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) but cleared four others – including former commandant Vice Admiral Rodolfo Isorena – in the cases filed in connection with the irregular procurement of phone cards worth more than P6 million in 2014.
In its 45-page decision dated Jan. 13, the anti-graft court’s Second Special Division acquitted Isorena, former deputy chief for comptrollership Capt. Joeven Fabul, former accounting head Rogelio Caguioa and former internal auditor Cdr. John Esplana of charges of violating the Government Procurement Reform Act.
Meanwhile, convicted were former PCG deputy chiefs Cdr. Joselito Quintas (three counts), Capt. Ramon Lopez (two counts), Cdrs. William Arquero and Rommel Supangan (one count).
Prosecutors accused the former PCG officials of violating the procurement law in seven different instances when they split into several transactions single requests for procurement of mobile phone cards.
According to the respondents, they resorted to “shopping” as form of procurement of the subject cellular cards as it was indicated in the PCG’s procurement plan.
Shopping is a form of procurement in which no public bidding is conducted and that at least three price quotations are obtained from suppliers. This is allowed when there is an unforeseen contingency requiring immediate purchase.
At the time of the transactions, the rules stated that the threshold for procurement via shopping should not exceed P500,000.
In its ruling, the court said the contracts were split for the purpose of circumventing this threshold.
“To meet the required threshold for shopping, the amounts indicated in the DVs (disbursement vouchers) were broken into two or three amounts, which are all below P500,000, by purchasing from several suppliers,” read the decision.
“Clearly, the accused split the amounts in the DVs to make them fall under the limited amount so that they could avail of the mode of procurement through shopping and thus avoid procurement through competitive bidding,” it added.
However, it ruled that conspiracy among the accused were not established and that their guilt had to be determined based on their individual roles.
The court said Isorena, Fabul, Caguioa and Esplana could not be held liable for splitting payment despite the presence of their signatures in the DVs, saying they relied on their subordinates in good faith when they affixed their signatures.
Supangan, Arquero, Lopez and Quintas were convicted because they acted as the special disbursing officers who are claimants of the cash advances.
“It cannot be denied that these four accused are the ones responsible for the splitting of payments,” read the ruling penned by Associate Justice Arthur Malabaguio.
“Cognizant of the fact that the threshold for shopping as a mode of procurement… they divided the amounts covered by the cash advances into two or three payments to different payees or suppliers. Payments were made on consecutive dates or on dates close to each other,” it added.
Those convicted were sentenced to imprisonment of six years and one day as minimum to 10 years as maximum per count.
Associate Justice Oscar Herrera Jr. and Presiding Justice Amparo Cabotaje-Tang concurred with the decision, while Associate Justices Michael Frederick Musngi and Bayani Jacinto dissented.
In his concurring and dissenting opinion, Musngi said Supangan, Arquero, Lopez and Quintas should have been acquitted because the prosecution failed to prove that the splitting was made to evade competitive bidding.
Meanwhile, in his partial dissenting opinion, Jacinto said he voted to acquit because he believes that the splitting of purchases do not come within the purview of the Government Procurement Reform Act.