Sandigan junks cases vs ex-TESDA officials
The court said the prosecution failed to prove the respondents’ guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on the six counts of graft filed against them
Daily TribuneThe court said the prosecution failed to prove the respondents’ guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on the six counts of graft filed against them
The Sandiganbayan has cleared six ex-officials of the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority, or TESDA, of graft charges.
The cases stemmed from the alleged anomalous procurement by TESDA of various testing and training equipment worth over P257 million in 2007.
In a 60-page decision promulgated on Monday, the court acquitted ex-TESDA bids and awards committee officials and members Teodoro Sanico, Juanito Belda, Francis Fang, Maximiano Montemayor, Ernesto Beltran and Buen Mondejar.
The court said the prosecution failed to prove the respondents' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on the six counts of graft filed against them.
The cases against the principal accused, Augusto Syjuco,
ex-deputy director-general Rogelio Peyuan, director Antonio del Rosario, and a private individual were dismissed because they had passed away.
Filed in 2013, the cases against the erstwhile TESDA officials stemmed from alleged irregularities in the implementation and disbursement of funds for the Ladderized Education Program and the Nordic Development Fund projects of the agency.
The TESDA officials reportedly entered into contracts with VG Roxas Company Inc. in relation to the procurement that was found by the Commission on Audit to be "grossly and manifestly disadvantageous to the government."
State prosecutors maintained that the training equipment and tools were overpriced from four percent to 42,732 percent. They also said the tools were defective, of low quality, had missing parts, and needed to be accompanied by operating manuals, making them unusable.
In clearing the bids committee members and secretariat, the Sandiganbayan ruled that it was the TESDA board and Syjuco that entered into the "questioned" contract with VG Roxas.
Moreover, the court said it was not convinced by the prosecution that the training tools and equipment in question were overpriced and defective.
The Sandiganbayan also brushed aside the prosecution's evidence, saying that it had failed to show that the six officials acted with manifest partiality, in evident bad faith, or were guilty of gross inexcusable negligence.
"As clearly spelled out in RA 9184, a BAC is created solely for the purpose of conducting the required bidding. The same holds true in the case of a BAC secretariat," the Sandiganbayan said.
"Simply put, the participation of the BAC and BAC secretariat ends after the bidding proper," the court ruled.
