Saturday, July 07, 2007 Spy cams supplier was paid additional P15M
A CONFERENCE at the anti-graft office yesterday confirmed what investigators had feared—P15 million in public funds has recently been transferred to the private account of Triton Communications Inc. as second payment for the P83 million worth of surveillance cameras for use during the Asean Summit.
Police Chief Insp. Jerry Leopoldo, whose certification resulted in the first disbursement of P63 million to Triton sometime in February this year, was again instrumental in the second payment although a letter from Police Regional Office 7 Chief Silverio Alarcio Jr. shows he wasn’t authorized to issue such certification.
The go-to-guy, according to Alarcio, in a letter to the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), a copy of which is now in possession of anti-graft investigators, was Senior Supt. Lani-o Nerez, the deputy of the security task force for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) summit.
There is a scheduled third release. It can still be stopped since the disbursement papers for it aren’t yet in order. But the amount is much lower—at a little over P6 million.
Leopoldo attended the conference yesterday at the anti-graft office. He sat across Crisologo Saavedra and, at one point in the proceedings, got the businessman’s ire.
Saavedra, in an interview after the hearing, expressed his intent to lodge a separate criminal complaint against the police major, adding that there was an agreement between the anti-graft office and Alarcio to withhold the acceptance of the surveillance cameras so that the payment for it could also be withheld, at least, until after the anti-graft office wraps up its investigation on the subject.
He highlighted the damage caused by Leopoldo’s certification, alleging that the surveillance cameras Triton supplied was more overpriced than the lampposts of Gampik and Fabmik.
“If a mere police major can do this, any other public official can also do this. What will happen to the image of the Office of the Ombudsman then?” he said.
Through documents, he pointed out how the 40 surveillance cameras alone, complete with the devices and software that make it run, were priced at P20 million.
On the other hand, he explained, the engineering design, supply delivery and systems integration, including the processing of permits from the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC), supposedly reached P30,260.177.
“A third party expert commissioned by the Office of the Ombudsman has certified that all the equipment bought were plug and play. No systems integration was necessary,” he said.
“The cameras were just attached on top of Veco (Visayan Electric Co.) poles. There was no engineering design required. And you can check with the NTC. The permits was only P150,000,” he said.
He maintained that while the lampposts reached hundreds of millions in cost, there were also a few hundred of them out there.
“But there are only 40 surveillance cameras and not all of them are even working or are capable of giving real-time imagery,” he said.
Saavedra filed the original complaint that resulted in the investigation. He said he won the contract to supply the surveillance cameras by submitting the lowest bid but alleged that the right to supply the items was given to Triton instead.
He alleged that this was because he refused to dole out a 15 percent commission to certain DPWH officials.
Triton, he said, was initially disqualified from the bidding because the items it offered to supply were “non-responsive” to the items indicated in the terms of reference that the DPWH had published.
According to Saavedra’s original complaint, the award wasn’t only in violation of the Anti-graft and Corrupt Practices Act, it also was in violation of the provisions of the government procurement act.
Moreover, he said, the contract was disadvantageous to the government because the items being delivered were grossly overpriced.
This allegation of overpricing prompted the anti-graft office to seek the commitment of the Philippine National Police to withhold the acceptance of the project so that payment could also be withheld at least until the investigation is over. (KNR)
