Thursday, January 11, 2007 Ombud orders fact-finding on camera purchase
THE complaint on the alleged anomalies surrounding the acquisition of surveillance cameras for use in the Asean summit will be downgraded into a fact-finding investigation.
This, sources said, is because of a civil suit that businessman Crisologo Saavedra filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC).
While the civil suit simply aims to stop the government from paying the supplier, Triton Communications Corp., it brought to light the legality of the acquisition.
“This will tie our hands,” said Ombudsman Director Virginia Santiago.
Judge Estela Alma Singco, in an order mid-December, denied Saavedra’s prayer for a restraining order, saying the businessman lost the right to be a party in the proceedings after he lost the contract.
She then issued an inhibition order on the case and had the matter re-raffled, even as the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and the Land Bank of the Philippines released P62.8 million as partial payment for the items.
This in turn made Saavedra file a plunder case against the responsible officials.
Santiago said they are evaluating the plunder case to see if this can be treated separately from the original complaint.
But sources within the office said the plunder case may not stand, not because of the weakness of the complainant’s evidence but because it didn’t meet the requirements of law.
Plunder
Plunder, defined and penalized under Republic Act 7080, deals more with ill-gotten wealth.
“Any public officer who, by himself or in connivance with members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business associates, subordinates or other persons, amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt or criminal acts... in the aggregate amount of P50 million shall be guilty of the crime of plunder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to death,” Section 3 says.
The allegations contained in Saavedra’s complaint cannot be seen as plunder unless he is able to show that the money obtained from the alleged illegal transaction was deposited in the accounts of the respondent or their dummies.
Santiago refused to comment, saying the matter is still subject to evaluation.
The allegations raised by some cause-oriented groups against the surveillance camera procurement, plus added allegations that the decorative lampposts for use in the summit were overpriced, may be integrated in the fact-finding.
Santiago said the allegations from the cause-oriented group came in the form of a request for assistance, so the appropriate action is to hold a fact-finding inquiry.
In a letter to Santiago last Tuesday, the group expressed alarm over the procurement and asked that the Department of Public Works and Highways make public the documents on the purchases.
Jaime Paglinawan, representing the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan in Central Visayas, and Ramie Inopiquez of the Panaghugpong sa Kabus sa Dakbayan jointly signed the letter.
So did Nick Abasolo of the Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas, Victor Lapaz of the Panaghiusa sa mga Gagmay’ng Mangingisda sa Sugbo and Winnie Badayos of the Alyansa sa Mamumuo sa Sugbo. (KNR)
