TWO former officials of Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority (MCIAA) may heave a sigh of relief.
The Sandiganbayan granted their motion and recalled the warrant of arrest issued against former MCIAA bids and awards chairperson Veronica Ordoñez and then legal officer Sigfredo Dublin.
While their arrest warrant was recalled, the graft case against them will continue since the anti-graft court has yet to resolve their motion to quash information relative to the allegedly anomalous P38.14-million fire truck deal in 2006.
The Ombudsman earlier found probable cause to indict the accused, along with former Mactan airport manager Adelberto Yap and two others, for graft.
The case stemmed from the complaint filed by businessman Cris Saavedra, who supposedly won the bidding at the MCIAA but failed to get the account, as this was given to somebody else.
Saavedra said that the MCIAA board wrote to an Austrian, Indonesian, and American company and invited them to submit letters of intent to bid.
On Jan. 26, 2006, the companies submitted their letters and offered their models of an Airport Rescue Firefighting Vehicle.
A pre-bid conference was held and representatives of Rosenbauer and Zeigler, the two firms whose bids were pre-qualified, were in attendance.
Saavedra said he tried to stop the bidding, informing the respondent officials that it violated Republic Act (RA) 5183.
In their pleading, Ordoñez and Dublin asked the Sandiganbayan to reconsider its resolution indicting them of the charged offense, claiming there was “inordinate delay” in the conduct of preliminary investigation before the Office of the Ombudsman.
It was, however, denied since the delay in the proceedings before the Ombudsman is not the kind of delay that is constitutionally abhorred.
In granting the accused’s motion to recall the arrest warrant, though, the Sandiganbayan said the accused sent an advance copy of their motion to the Office of the Special Prosecutor four days prior to the scheduled hearing.
Due to humanitarian consideration, the anti-graft court considered the distance and expenses they would incur in traveling to Manila to attend their hearing.
The bond posted by the accused was also reinstated.
Likewise, the Sandiganbayan gave the prosecution 10 days to submit its comment on the motion to quash the charge, which the respondents had filed. (GMD)