Graft charges vs ex-Cebu congressmen dismissed

Rappler.com

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

Graft charges vs ex-Cebu congressmen dismissed
The anti-graft court Sandiganbayan notes the argument of the defense that it took the Ombudsman more than 10 years to investigate and file the information with the court

MANILA, Philippines – The anti-graft court Sandiganbayan on Monday, January 16, threw out the graft charges against former Cebu representatives Antonio Cuenco and Antonio Yapha Jr, citing the unreasonable delay in the investigation which took over a decade.

In a 21-page resolution, the Sandiganbayan’s 5th Division granted separate motions to dismiss the graft charges, which were filed by the former congressmen.

The court said the length of the investigation violated the defendants’ rights to due process and an otherwise swift resolution of the case.

But the charges against Eduardo Lecciones, former Department of Agriculture-Regional Field Unit 7 executive director, remain.

Cuenco and Yapha were accused of misusing their Priority Development Assistance Funds (PDAF) in 2004, totaling P6 million. In a resolution issued in April 2016, the Office of the Ombudsman indicted the former lawmakers for alleged direct participation in a fraudulent transaction by endorsing a non-governmental organization (NGO) that was neither eligible nor qualified to implement the project.

Kasosyo Foundation, Incorporated (KFI) was awarded a project that did not go through public bidding. The NGO also did not have a track record of handling agricultural assistance projects worth millions of pesos.

Based on the Ombudsman’s investigation, KFI bought 4,000 bottles of liquid fertilizer for P1,500 per bottle. The Ombudsman and government auditors found these to be overpriced. 

The defense pushed for the dismissal of the charges, noting that it took 10 years and 6 months from the start of the investigation to the filing of the information. As a result, the cases did not go to trial. The fact-finding investigation began on February 2006 while the information was filed before the Sandiganbayan on August 24, 2016.

The court also noted the argument that the 10-and-a-half-year gap made it more difficult to mount a good defense, especially as a result of the current ages of the Yapha and Cuenco who are 79 and 80, respectively. Yapha also pointed out he was having difficulty recalling the relevant circumstances and records from 10 years ago. 

“The Office of the Ombudsman’s duty is not merely to investigate and prosecute cases against erring public officials. It is mandated by law to act with dispatch. This court is thus constrained to grant accused Cuenco and Yapha’s motion to dismiss these cases,” the Sandiganbayan said. – Rappler.com

Add a comment

Sort by

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

Summarize this article with AI

How does this make you feel?

Loading
Download the Rappler App!