Sandigan upholds evidence vs former Antique governor

The Sandiganbayan’s third division has upheld the evidence presented in the graft case filed by the Office of the Ombudsman against former Antique governor Jovito Plameras.

In a resolution penned by Associate Justice Norberto Geraldez and concurred in by Associate Justices Godofredo Legaspi and Efren de la Cruz, the anti-graft court dismissed Plameras’ demurrer to evidence.

A demurrer is a pleading filed by an accused questioning the legal sufficiency of the evidence presented against him by the prosecution.

"Absent any evidence to the contrary, the prosecution’s evidence had established that the accused violated Section 3(e) of RA (Republic Act) 3019 (or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act)," the court ruled.

Plameras was charged with graft in connection with the allegedly anomalous purchase of school furniture worth P5.67 million nine years ago.

The Office of the Ombudsman submitted to the Sandiganbayan documents showing that there was an anomalous disbursement of the amount in April 1997 in favor of CKL Enterprises, a private firm owned by Jesusa de la Cruz which was supposed to deliver 1,355 school desks and 5,246 armchairs.

Prosecutors, however, questioned how the money was paid to De la Cruz even before the school desks and armchairs were delivered, besides the absence of any authorization from the provincial school board and any public bidding in the purchase.

The Office of the Ombudsman added that when delivery was finally made after some delays, many armchairs were defective and were unusable.

Further inspection also revealed that the delivery was short of 60 desks and 3,408 armchairs, which meant that the province was short-changed in the amount of P2.77 million.

In his demurrer, Plameras claimed that it was the Land Bank of the Philippines, which released the money as payment to De la Cruz despite the incomplete documentation.

Plameras added that the contract was entered into between the Department of Education (DepEd) and the contractor after a failure of bidding was declared, hence he was not given the opportunity to call for a public bidding.

He also claimed that there was no damage to the provincial government, contrary to the Ombudsman’s assertion, since the funds came from DepEd.

The Sandiganbayan, however, said Plameras’ claims are better ventilated in a full-blown trial.

"(Plameras’) arguments are matters of defense. (They) must be threshed out and duly proven during the defense’s presentation of evidence," it said.