WHEN the mundane process of paying for trash collection allegedly becomes a mechanism for large-scale financial abuse, officials must answer for negligence that reportedly cost government millions of pesos.
Eight former Cebu City officials, including a former city administrator, and three private individuals now face imminent arrest after the Ombudsman-Visayas filed graft and malversation of public funds charges before the Sandiganbayan, the Philippines’ anti-graft court, on Nov, 24, 2025.
The filing of malversation of public funds and violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act before the Sandiganbayan was approved by then-Acting Ombudsman Dante Vargas on Oct. 6.
Who’s charged
The accused include former city administrator Floro Casas Jr., city accountant Jerome Ornopio, acting city treasurer Mare Vae Reyes and John Jigo Dacua, Grace Luardo-Silva, Allen Ceballos, Romelito Datan and Mark Ugbinar, all from the Department of Public Services (DPS). The eight officials and employees were ordered dismissed by the Ombudsman in a March 14, 2024 resolution. The private individuals charged are Jayra Ruiz-Javier, authorized managing officer of Docast/JJ & J Construction; John David Javier, operations manager; and Erika Quino, encoder.
Twin charges
The case involves two major charges, raising its gravity:
1. Violation of Republic Act (RA) 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act – This bailable charge alleges that the officials gave unwarranted benefits to the private contractors, causing undue injury to the city government. A P90,000 bail is recommended.
2. Malversation of Public Funds (Revised Penal Code) – This non-bailable charge alleges that the accused allowed the contractor to overcharge the City by a total of P239,728,280.62 through doctored, faulty, or incorrect billing.
The imminent issuance of arrest warrants signals that the accused must surrender to the court and post bail where applicable, before their subsequent arraignment. The case will then proceed to trial, where the Ombudsman’s evidence of billing discrepancies and alleged falsified documents must prove a criminal conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt.
Case background
The alleged scheme dates back to Feb. 17, 2021. The eight accused are charged under Section 3(e) of RA 3019 for conspiring, through “manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence,” to grant unwarranted benefits to the contractors, causing undue injury to Cebu City.
This case highlights a breakdown in checks and balances. Officials tasked with verifying, reviewing and monitoring billing statements allegedly failed in their duties, exposing the City’s finances to significant risk.
Why overpayment matters
The alleged overpayment — nearly P240 million — represents funds that could have supported schools, hospitals, infrastructure, or disaster relief.
• Massive Financial Loss: The contract rate for barangay garbage disposal was P600 per ton, but the City was allegedly billed P1,800 per ton — a three-fold increase.
• Erosion of Public Trust: When key finance officials allegedly allow such overpayments, public confidence in government financial management is undermined.
• Price of Negligence: Simple failures in rate verification are said to have allowed the overbilling to continue, highlighting systemic vulnerabilities.
Ombudsman’s perspective
The Ombudsman found “sufficient ground to engender a well-founded belief that the crimes were committed and that the accused are probably guilty thereof.” Investigators summarized the alleged conspiracy in three points:
• Failing to properly verify, review, or monitor billing statements.
• Not cross-checking submitted bills.
• Including the three-times-higher rate in the billings.
The accused may argue in court that the overpayment was a clerical error or misinterpretation of the contract, or that they acted in good faith without intent to conspire.
The alleged scheme
The scheme involved billing the City at P1,800 per ton instead of the agreed P600 per ton, leading to the total overpayment of P239,728,280.62. The involvement of key city finance officials alongside DPS inspectors suggests that the alleged wrongdoing required coordination across multiple financial checkpoints.
Lessons learned
The case illustrates how institutional complacency can be exploited. Public procurement can be complex, but the failure to verify basic contract rates points to weaknesses in oversight. The management of waste — a critical public service — remains a systemic vulnerability where operational urgency and high contract values expose public funds to potential fraud and collusion.
This case serves as a warning to other local government units that robust monitoring, accountability and automated oversight mechanisms are necessary to prevent similar losses. / MVG