MANILA, Philippines — A city resident has sued top officials of the city government of Pasay, including the mayor and the vice mayor, for graft in the Office of the Ombudsman in connection to the 300-hectare Manila Bay reclamation project.
In an order dated March 6, the Office of the Ombudsman has ordered the Pasay Mayor Tony Calixto, Vice Mayor Marlon Pesebre, the city’s 13 city councilors, and its city legal counsel Severo Madrona to explain their side and file their counter-affidavits within 10 working days.
The 18-page complaint obtained by the Philippine Daily Inquirer was filed by a certain Vivencio E. Fernandez, a Pasay city resident. But the city legal counsel Severo Madrona called the complainant as “fictitious,” and the complaint as politically motivated.
The complaint enumerated the supposed violations committed by the city government, backed by a city council resolution, when it entered into a joint venture agreement with SM Land Inc.
The P54.5-billion project was aimed at reclaiming and developing the foreshore and offshore areas on Manila Bay located in the western part of the city.
According to the deal, SM will undertake and fully finance the project, including the cost of the necessary permits, clearances and other government requirements.
Earlier, complaints raised by SM’s rival Ayala Land Inc. and S & P Construction Technology prompted the city council to withdraw the resolution supporting the deal last December.
It issued a resolution two weeks later that the implementation of the controversial project with SM would proceed.
In the newest complaint, Fernandez said the city officials violated Sections 3 and 4 of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act or RA 3019.
The complainant also sought the officials’ preventive suspension.
Fernandez reiterated some of the issues raised by ALI officials in a city council hearing in November last year, which included the inadequacies in the bid documents and the absence of minimum design parameters, performance standards, specifications, and economic parameters.
He said that the S & P likewise assailed the P5 billion security, saying it was excessive and 33 times higher than that imposed under the Build-Operate-and-Transfer (BOT) law.
The terms of reference, he said, did not indicate important criteria such as “method, the criteria for evaluation of technical components of the bid, listing of requirements from concerned regulatory agencies, expected completion date, and nationality and ownership requirements.”
The complainant also questioned the adoption of the 2008 National Economic and Development Authority, as the city government of Pasay overlooked the changes in the 2013 guidelines.
But even so, the complainant said the city government has failed to strictly follow the 2008 guidelines of the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) in terms of the selection of those who would sit in the Private-Public Partnership Selection Committee.
He said the Commission on Audit, NEDA and the private sector representatives were excluded from the selection of members of the PPP-SC members.
“(T)hese flaws and inadequacies are too fundamental to be excused, especially for a project of this magnitude and importance,” Fernandez said.
Sought for comment, Madrona said: “The complaint was intended to harass and embarrass the city council after it voted unanimously to affirm the awarding of the contract to SM.”
He noted that the contract was awarded based on the unsolicited proposal of SM to undertake a project without any cost on the part of the government.
While the council has given the green light to project, it is still under review by various agencies like Philippine Reclamation Authority, Department of Interior and Local Government, National Economic and Development Authority and the Office of the President, according to Madrona.