"I find the decision utterly unfair, unjust, cruel and senseless. I am so disgusted, incensed and bitter over this unjust decision that I cannot help but begin losing faith in our present system of laws and judicial processes," former UP Diliman chancellor Roger Posadas said.
In a statement, the former UP professor admitted being appointed "project director" of a foreign-funded project for the design of 15 graduate courses for a master’s program in Technology Management, but denied committed any wrongdoing.
"We did not embezzle, nor steal, nor misappropriate any UP funds, nor did we receive any kickbacks, or commissions, or bribes. And neither did we cause any financial loss or disadvantage to UP or the government," he said, in reference to co-accused former UP vice chancellor Rolando Dayco.
Posadas pointed out that unlike most universities today, especially in the US, professors "who seek and bring in externally funded research and consultancy projects are highly valued, commended and rewarded."
"In my case, however, I was unjustly prosecuted and persecuted by then UP president Emil Javier after a series of policy conflicts with him in 1995 to 1996," he complained.
He added Javier "succeeded" in forcing them to resign from UP after he filed the case in 1998.
Posadas also wondered as to how the graft and unethical conduct cases managed to prosper in the court when this was initially recommended dismissed by the graft investigator and upheld by the assistant Ombudsman, only to be "overruled" by then Ombudsman Aniano Desierto.
"So, to make a crime out of an administrative irregularity is a travesty of justice. The ruling also appears to have established a dangerous precedent," Posadas stressed, noting that administrative violations can now be upgraded to "criminal prosecution, conviction."
"It was the same system under Marcos, which led some of us to seek revolutionary solutions to overhaul our country’s judicial system and purge it to injustice, unfairness, incompetence and corruption," he reiterated.
Justices of the court’s fourth division held Posadas and Dayco liable for graft. They said Dayco (as OIC chancellor) did not have the authority to designate Posadas to the post since his power only emanates from the UP Board of Regents.
"There is evidence on record to support the finding that there is indeed evident bad faith on the part of both accused. Being the highest officials of UP Diliman, they knew very well the limitations of Dayco’s authority as OIC chancellor," the Sandiganbayan ruled.
Justices Gregory Ong, Rodolfo Ponferrada and Jose Hernandez noted that since Posadas’ authority was merely "delegated" to him by the UP Board of Regents, "he could not validly delegate it to Dayco."
"Posadas’ authority to appoint directors and consultants is merely a delegated authority to the chancellor, which he used to occupy during the material dates alleged in the information," the anti-graft court said.