Top local officials of Silay City, Negros Occidental face graft charges in connection with P18M IT project
08 June 2011, source: Ombudsman Website
visit:
https://goo.gl/zf9rLbTop local officials of Silay City, Negros Occidental are facing graft charges in connection with an P18M Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Project procured in January 2008.
In a 39-page Resolution, Acting Ombudsman Orlando C. Casimiro ordered the filing of graft charges before the SAndiganbayan against Mayor Jose Montelibano, Vice-Mayor Mark Andrew Arthur Golez, Councilors Jose Raymundo Locsin and Joedith Gallego and former Councilors Michael Maravilla, Mario Torres, Ramon Jison, Warlito Go, Salvador Segovia, and April Grace delos Reyes.
Also named in the Resolution were City Administrator Ignacio Salmingo, OIC-City Treasurer Elsie Jimenea, OIC-City Accountant Emmanuel Arsenal, City Legal Officer and Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) Chair Atty. Kara Aimee Quevenco; BAC Members Pepito Hechanova, Jr., Alma dela Cruz, Ricardo Ledesma, Jr., and Engr. Sonia Cordero; BAC Secretariat Head Macarse Tionko and BAC Secretariat Members Armin Paredes, Alore Golez, and Vilma Dooma; BAC-Technical Working Group (BAC-TWG) Head Engr. Rene Roy Pahilanga, and BAC-TWG Members Giovanni Guzon, Jesus Oppus, Arnier Trajera and Jose Genaro Estrañero ; and Engr. Julieta Cunanan of the Systems and Plan Integrator Development Corporation (SPIDC).
Records of the case showed that the local government of Silay, Negros Occidental entered into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the SPIDC in January 2008 for the ICT Project.
The said project aims to computerize the city’s major revenue generating operation, to be financed through a loan agreement with the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP).
However, complainants questioned the immediate resort to alternative mode of procurement by direct contracting, in violation of RA 9184 (Government Procurement Reform Act).
Sec. 50, RA 9184 provides: “Direct contracting – Direct contracting may be resorted to only in any of the following conditions:
a. Xxx
b. Xxx
c. Those sold by an exclusive dealer or manufacturer, which does not have sub-dealers selling at lower prices and for which no suitable substitute can be obtained at more advantageous terms to the government.â€
The Resolution stated that “in the instant case, the evidence presented would show that there other Information and Communication Technology companies offering the same line of goods and services.â€
Hence, the Office found probable cause to indict respondents for Violation of Sec. 3 (e) of RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act).
At the same time, the public respondents were meted the penalty of suspension for eight months and one day after being adjudged guilty of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service. The Office however took note of the re-election and the fact that some local officials are no longer in public service. Nevertheless, the Office stated that “let this Decision be a warning and reminder to public officials to always act on their respective duties with much circumspect so as not hinder and prejudice public serviceâ€.
Linkback:
https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=88172.0