CA affirms dismissal of raps vs Quezon gov, 9 others

MANILA, Philippines - The Court of Appeals (CA) has affirmed the dismissal of administrative charges against Quezon Gov. David Suarez and nine board members for passing a resolution in 2011 giving him power to enter into contracts for the provincial government.

In a 15-page decision released last Friday, the CA’s 11th Division affirmed the Nov. 28, 2011 ruling of the Office of the President that junked the complaint filed by Vice Gov. Vicente Alcala, whose power in approving contracts by the provincial capitol was clipped in the Sangguniang Panlalawigan’s assailed Resolution No. 2011-750.

Also cleared were provincial board members Romano Talaga, Teresita Dator, Lourdes de Luna-Pasatiempo, Victor Reyes, Manuel Butardo, Gerald Ortiz, Rachel Ubana, Joanna Rose Martija, and Donaldo Suarez, the governor’s brother.

Citing Section 465, Article 1, Chapter 3 of the Local Government Code of 1990, the CA held that the provincial governor shall “represent the province in all its business transactions and sign in its behalf all bonds, contracts, and obligations, and such other documents upon authority of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan or pursuant to law or ordinance.”

It added that the provincial board, as the province’s legislative body, has the power to authorize the governor to, among other things, negotiate and contract loans and lease public buildings to private parties as mandated by Republic Act 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991). 

Alcala filed the complaint with the Office of the President on Sept. 3, 2011 and sought the suspension of Suarez and the nine board members.

He alleged the resolution, which removed his name as signatory in the contracts entered into by the provincial capitol, was illegal since it was passed in a special session without his consent as the Sanggunian’s presiding officer.

He argued that his inclusion as a co-signatory in business contracts serves as an “anticipatory corruption-proof measure” sanctioned by the Local Government Code.

But the CA said the vice governor’s inclusion as a co-signatory and as a witness to various memoranda of agreement constitutes “undue interference with the functions of the local chief executive.”

“What is indispensable is the authorization of the Sanggunian as a collegial body and not the separate authorization or consent of the vice governor,” the CA said, adding that Alcala “had already given his prior authorization to the governor to enter into contracts with various government agencies.”

The appellate court also said Alcala failed to show evidence that the special session called for by Suarez to pass the resolution was done with malice, corrupt practice or in bad faith.

“Charges based on mere suspicion and speculation… cannot be given credence,” said the CA in its decision penned by Associate Justice Magdangal de Leon.

Associate Justices Stephen Cruz and Myra Garcia-Fernandez concurred with the ruling.