90 years for graft for ex-Mindoro solon | Inquirer News

90 years for graft for ex-Mindoro solon

/ 05:07 AM November 18, 2016

The Sandiganbayan sentenced on Thursday former Occidental Mindoro Rep. Jose Villarosa to a maximum of 90 years’ imprisonment, after finding him guilty of allowing quarrying operations in San Jose town without permits from the provincial governor.

In a 20-page decision, the antigraft court’s First Division held Villarosa liable for nine counts of violating Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

For each count, he was meted the penalty of imprisonment from a minimum of six years and one month to a maximum of 10 years. He was also perpetually disqualified from public office.

Article continues after this advertisement

Villarosa was accused of unlawfully issuing extraction permits to private quarrying operators when he was San Jose mayor from 2010 to 2013.  Section 138 of the Local Government Code of 1991, however, allows only the provincial governor to regulate and levy taxes on extraction activities.

FEATURED STORIES

The questioned permits were issued to Gem CHB Maker, Timoteo Aguilar, Arvi Dolojan, Andres Pablo, R. D. Go Concrete Products, Jojo Pojas, Emilia T. De Lara, Antonio Villaroza, and Jessie Glass and Aluminum Enterprise, from September 2010 to June 2011.

Good faith

Article continues after this advertisement

In its decision, the court rejected Villarosa’s claim that the provincial governor’s exclusive authority is not vested in the absence of a valid provincial ordinance. It said Section 138 of the LGC was a clear and explicit provision.

Article continues after this advertisement

Villarosa also could not claim he was acting on good faith  because he defied a cease and desist order issued by the provincial environment office, it said.

Article continues after this advertisement

While Villarosa denied profiting from quarrying activities, the decision said that the fact that the San Jose municipality did not sustain any injury was irrelevant.

Citing the profits of the quarrying operators, the court said he violated Section 3(e) of the graft law’s prohibition on giving any private party unwarranted benefits.

Article continues after this advertisement

“These private individuals clearly benefited from the illegal issuance by the accused of the extraction permits since this paved the way for them to conduct extraction and quarrying activities without the proper authorization—presumably, to their own profit and advantage, for why else would they persist even after repeated notices that the activities they were engaged in were illegal?” the decision read.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

TAGS:

No tags found for this post.
Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.