MANILA, Philippines – The Sandiganbayan dismissed the graft charges against former Philippine ambassador to the United Nations (UN) Lauro Baja Jr, ruling that there was no sufficient evidence to say Baja made up expenses which he was later able to reimburse.

The expenses in question total $28,934, which in today’s exchange rate would be equivalent to P1.4 million. These expenses were incurred by Baja from 2003 to 2005 when he was still ambassador to the UN.

He was charged for one count of graft in 2011 after an investigation showed that the reimbursements were without proper and complete documentation. The expenses were also allegedly “fictitious.”

Investigators found that Baja only submitted computerized receipts and photocopies of checks. The checks also didn’t state the purpose of the expenses, and it was not indicated whether the checks were received by the payees and subsequently paid by the bank.

Most of the expenses had to do with dinner costs for delegations, including the fees paid to waiters.

The investigation also quoted a manager of one of the establishments hired by Baja for a catered event as saying that the amounts listed by Baja were unusually high. “He usually charges about $10 per head and an additional $6 for drinks, including wine. The receipt shows $40 per head,” said the initial investigation report.

“He (the manager) does not serve cocktails and does not apply service charge. The receipt shows the contrary.”

Baja filed a motion to dismiss the case for lack of sufficient evidence, which the Special 4th Division granted.

In its ruling promulgated on March 20, the court said the prosecution was not able to provide sufficient evidence that the expenses were fictitious.

“The mere fact that the checks submitted as proof of payment do not show that they were honored and paid for does not mean that the same were not paid,” the court said.

The justices also noted that the “teams sent by the Philippine government to conduct the audit and/or fact-finding investigation should have delved deeper and made inquiries to determine if payments or expenses sought to be reimbursed by the accused were indeed made.”

“This court gives it to the prosecution that there was, indeed, improper documentation of reimbursement of expenses. Unfortunately, it could not lead to a conclusion that these documents, even if improper, are evidence of non-existent or fictitious transactions,” the court said.

The resolution was penned by Associate Justice Geraldine Faith Econg with concurrences from Associate Justices Alex Quiroz and Reynaldo Cruz. – Rappler.com