Sandigan suspends Ilog mayor, 8 others

THE Sandiganbayan fifth division has ordered a 90-day suspension against Mayor John Paul Alvarez and eight other officials of Ilog town for alleged violation of Section 3 of Republic Act 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

The order was promulgated last September 21 by Sandiganbayan fifth division chairperson Roland Jurado and Associate Justices Alexander Gesmundo and Amparo Cabotaje-Tang.

Also slapped with the 90 days suspension were Manuel Sitchon, Elbert Magbato, Joseph Wuijano, Hegel Dumadia, Alberto Hidalanon, Joelito Cordero, Jany Joe Bobon and Arsenia Juanero for their being the municipal engineer and chairman of the Bids and Awards Committee (BAC), planning officer and BAC vice chairman, municipal health officer and BAC member, Ilog District I supervisor and BAC member, draftsman/inspector designate and property officer of Ilog.

The suspension is in line with the alleged changing of the engine of the service vehicle provided by the Municipal Government of Ilog to the Department of Education.

The case was filed by the late Ilog Municipal Council member Karem Gequillana.

Vice Governor Genaro Alvarez said that his son, Mayor Alvarez, will file a motion for reconsideration because the suspension is appealable.

"We are unfazed by these cases against our family," Alvarez said.

He said the order does not indicate that his son is guilty of the charges against him.

The order is in line with the "motion to suspend accused pendente lite," which was filed by the prosecution, praying for the suspension of the said Ilog officials.

Per order dated August 20, 2012, the officials were given 15 days to submit comment or opposition to the motion, but the period lapsed without the accused filing any such comment or opposition, the order said.

The order added that the information in this case is valid, as it satisfies the requirements for sufficiency under Section 6, Rule 110 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Preliminary investigation was conducted before the said information was filed and the records do not show that the proceedings that led to the filing thereof are tainted with irregularity, the order added.

It also noted that after a careful assessment of the records, the documents and other evidences submitted together with the information, the body found the existence of probable cause, which paved the way for the issuance of the warrant of arrest against the accused and on the basis of such finding, the information can be said to be sufficient in form and substance.

It may also be well noted that preventive suspension under the same Section 13 applies not only to the particular office in relation to which the public officer is charged but also to any office that he may currently be holding, the order also stated. (TDE)