Ombudsman denies motion in case vs Osmeña, 16 others

CEBU, Philippines — The Office of the Ombudsman has denied the motion for reconsideration in the case against former Mayor Tomas Osmeña and 16 others, including officials from Universal Hotels and Resorts, Inc. (UHRI), regarding the Joint Venture Agreement with the Gokongwei Group for the establishment of NUSTAR Resort and Casino at South Road Properties (SRP).

Businessman Crisologo Saavedra filed the case against Osmeña and former Cebu City government officials Margarita Osmeña, Sisinio Andales, Alvin Arcilla, Eugenio Gabuya Jr., and incumbent councilors Gerry Guardo, Joy Augustus Young, Mary Ann de los Santos, and Franklyn Ong. The case also included Frederick Go, Lance Gokongwei, James Go, Robina Gokongwei-Pe, and Patrick Henry Go.

In a decision signed by Graft Investigation and Prosecution Officer Rhyan Pañales and sent to the media on Tuesday, the Ombudsman denied Saavedra's motion for reconsideration. This decision upholds the earlier ruling that cleared Osmeña and others of criminal charges for violating Section 3 (e) and (g) of Republic Act No. 3019, as amended, and administrative charges for Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service and Conduct Unbecoming of a Public Official.

The Ombudsman’s decision also referenced the January 20, 2019, ruling by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 23 in Cebu City, which dismissed the complaint. The decision stated that there is no proof to overturn this ruling.

In 2018, Saavedra, who identifies as an anti-graft advocate, filed criminal and administrative complaints against Osmeña and other city officials, alleging that the Joint Venture Agreement with UHRI was “grossly disadvantageous to the city.”

The report further stated that Saavedra, in his complaint, alleged that the Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) was disadvantageous to the city because it would only receive a 10-percent profit share despite contributing P10 billion, which is more than half of the P18 billion total investment.

“Even assuming that the principle of res judicata does not find application in the present case, there is still not enough evidence to disturb the findings of this Office,” reads the decision of the Ombudsman.

The decision also noted that the complainant did not present new evidence to support the claim that UHRI lacked the “technical and financial capability and experience” when it entered into the JVA with the Local Government of Cebu City for the development, construction, and operation of an integrated resort and casino.

“A closer examination of his Motion reveals that the matters brought herein were mere reiterations of his arguments as already reflected in his initiatory pleading or complaint-affidavit,” it reads

It emphasized that the complainant failed to convince the Ombudsman that the Motion for Reconsideration had the necessary “factual and legal foundation to overturn the findings as contained in the assailed Joint Resolution.”

The decision further highlighted that there was no “sufficient ground to reverse its finding.”

Regarding UHRI's technical and financial capability, the Ombudsman stated that this issue had been long settled by the RTC Branch 23 in Cebu City.

Citing the RTC’s decision from January 20, 2019, it was declared that UHRI, as a member of the Gokongwei Group of Companies, possessed the necessary technical and financial capacity to undertake the billion-peso integrated resort project.

The same decision also upheld the validity of the council’s resolution dated August 8, 2018, which authorized Mayor Osmeña, on behalf of the City of Cebu, to enter into the JVA with UHRI. (FREEMAN)