A former commandant of the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) and 24 of his officials face multiple criminal charges of graft over an allegedly anomalous P68 million procurement of office, hardware, construction supplies, information technology equipment, and cellular phone cards in 2014.
In a statement Wednesday, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales indicted for violation of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act the following PCG officials:
- Retired Vice Adm. Rodolfo Isorena, former commandant (25 counts)
- Rear Adm. Cecil Chen
- Commo. William Melad
- Commo. Aaron Reconquista
- Capt. Joeven Fabul (25 counts)
- Capt. Angelito Gil (two counts)
- Capt. Angel Lobaton IV
- Capt. Christopher Villacorte
- Capt. Ramon Lopez
- Cdr. John Esplana (16 counts)
- Cdr. William Arquero (two counts),
- Cdr. Jude Thaddeus Besinga (two counts)
- Cdr. Roben De Guzman (two counts)
- Cdr. Enrico Efren Evangelista Jr.
- Cdr. Ferdinand Panganiban
- Cdr. Joselito Quintas
- Cdr. Ivan Roldan (two counts)
- Cdr. Rommel Supangan
- Cdr. George Ursabia Jr.
- Cdr. Ferdinand Velasco
- Cdr. Wilfred Burgos
- Cdr. Allen Dalangin
- Lt. Mark Larsen Mariano
- Ens. Mark Franklin Lim II
- accounting head Rogelio Caguioa (25 counts)
- Isorena, Esplana, Fabul, Caguioa, Arquero, Lopez, and Quintas were also indicted for violating Section 65 of the Government Procurement Reform Act.
In the 83-page consolidated resolution, investigators from the Office of the Ombudsman reported that there was fraud in the canvassing and delivery of the items.
The investigators found irregular transactions involving the cellular card allowance – Arquero in his total budget of P930,300, Lopez and Quintas in their P4,239,710 budget, and Supangan in his P899,700 budget.
The investigators said the officials split the purchases into several transactions to avoid public bidding.
The officials also split the contract in the disbursement of the P4 million budget for troops and organizational support, as well as “command and staff support.”
The purchases of regular office supplies, cleaning materials, hardware, and groceries were split into P1 million purchases from February to May 2014 to avoid public bidding, the Ombudsman said.
The Ombudsman found the officials liable for graft for acting with manifest partiality, evident bad faith, and gross inexcusable negligence in using public funds to purchase cell cards, hardware, office, and construction items, without public bidding.
IT supplies – such as Moleskine journals, Artline fabric markers, Pilot ballpens, Epson styluses, colored printer ink, wireless optical mouses, energizers, paints, screwdrivers, and wireless routers – were also purchased without public bidding.
“The above deficiencies should have prevented the disbursements or, at the very least, inspired caution considering the amounts involved and the frequency in which they were being requested. Still, the SCAs were approved and a total of P68,041,832.00 in public funds released,” the Ombudsman said.
The Ombudsman also found the respondents administratively liable for Serious Dishonesty, Grave Misconduct, and Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service.
They were ordered penalized with dismissal from the service, cancellation of eligibility, forfeiture of retirement benefits, and perpetual disqualification from holding public office.
In case the respondents are separated from service, the penalty shall be converted to a fine equivalent to the respondent’s one-year salary.
According to Section 3(e) of the anti-graft law, it is a criminal offense for a public official to cause any undue injury to any party, including the Government, or to give any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his official administrative or judicial functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence.
Meanwhile, Section 65 of the Government Procurement Reform Act or the Republic Act 9184 penalizes the splitting of contracts with government to avoid public bidding. /atm