Ex-PCGG chief, other execs face graft raps
MANILA, Philippines—The Office of the Ombudsman has filed graft cases against five former officials of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) for leasing P12 million worth of vehicles without public bidding in 2007 and 2009.
Charged before the Sandiganbayan were former PCGG Chairman Camilo Sabio and Commissioners Ricardo Abcede, Tereso Javier, Narciso Nario and Nicasio Conti.
The PCGG had leased five vehicles from UCPB Leasing and Finance Corp. in 2007, and six vehicles in 2009.
In its resolution ordering the filing of charges against the former PCGG officials, the Office of the Ombudsman said deviating from competitive public bidding and resorting to alternative modes of procurement is only allowed in extraordinary situations.
There were no extraordinary circumstances to justify the alternative procurement of the vehicles, it said.
“Certainly, the circumstances surrounding the lease of the vehicles in question indubitably show that the complained transaction is outside the ambit of extraordinary situations contemplated by the procurement law and the PCGG charter,” it said.
In their defense, the PCGG officials told the Ombudsman that despite recovering P48 billion for the government, they were still being accused of prejudicing it. According to them, the complaint was meant to harass and malign them, and that there was no injury to the government in the transactions.
The Office of the Ombudsman also said that even if the resident auditor found nothing illegal or irregular in the lease, and even if the procurement was covered by the national budget, the lease contract of the vehicles still violated the procurement law.
It said that even granting, for the sake of argument, that the lease of vehicles was covered by negotiated procurement, the capability of the supplier was in serious doubt. It noted that UCPB Leasing is sequestered by the PCGG.
“This places the technical, legal and financial capability of the leasing company questionable. Thus, assuming that no private party was involved, the government would certainly be prejudiced by their contract,” it added.—Leila B. Salaverria
