MANILA, Philippines – The Sandiganbayan, the country’s anti-graft court, had affirmed a graft case against former Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) executive director Samuel Aloysius Jardin in a resolution dated June 13.

The anti-graft court’s Sixth Division denied Jardin’s motion to quash and motion to suspend proceedings for lack of merit. The division’s chairperson, Associate Justice Sarah Jane Fernandez penned the resolution, while Associate Justices Karl Miranda and Kevin Narce Vivero had concurred.

However, the former LTFRB chief’s other case, SB-23-CRM-0055 for alleged violation of section 7 of Republic Act No. (RA) 6713 or Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, had been dismissed by the court “without prejudice.”

The court’s affirmation of the case for alleged violation of section 3(c) of RA No. 3019 or Anti-graft and Corrupt Practices Act means the anti-graft court will continue the trial for Jardin’s remaining case.

According to the Sandiganbayan, the information or the charge against the former LTFRB chief alleged that he “directly or indirectly requested and received the amount of more or less $4,600,000.00 from Michelle Sapangila, for whom he will secure or obtain the issuance by the LTFRB of a Certificate of Public Convenience (CPC), in consideration for assistance, facilitation or help to be given by him.”

In its resolution, the Sandiganbayan said Jardin raised a point on the preliminary investigation’s regularity. However, the anti-graft court said “assuming” there was indeed an irregularity in the said phase, it “will not render the informations void nor impair their validity.”

Jardin also raised in his motion that the cases against him should be dismissed because more than one case had been filed using the same set of facts. However, the court said charging with more than one case for the same set of facts is not a ground for quashing a case under Rule 117 of the Rules of Court.

Meanwhile, the Sandiganbayan explained the dismissal of the other case by pointing the People vs. Gelacio decided by the Supreme Court. Under the said ruling, if a person had been charged with alleged violation of RA No. 6713 and with another case imposing higher penalty for the same act(s), the accused should be prosecuted under the case with higher penalty and the charge for RA No. 6173 should be dismissed.

In Jardin’s case, the RA No. 6713 case had been dismissed because RA No. 3019 could impose higher sanction.

Former president Rodrigo Duterte appointed Jardin to the LTFRB on March 20, 2018. However, he was suspended after serving for only a year based on the orders of then-transportation chief Arthur Tugade.

Tugade’s order dated April 3, 2019 claimed the accused allegedly committed misconduct in office, and criminal and administrative complaints were filed with the Office of the Ombudsman on the same day.

The Ombudsman, on December 22, 2020, ordered Jardin’s dismissal from his post after he was found guilty of grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service. The Court of Appeals affirmed the Ombudsman’s position in a decision dated September 20, 2022. – Rappler.com