The Sandiganbayan has denied anew the appeal of a private “co-conspirator” of former Tuao, Cagayan officials who allegedly had a hand in the anomalous fertilizer scam in 2004.

In a resolution dated 1 April but released only recently, the anti-graft court’s Fifth Division said there was “no compelling reason” to reverse its March ruling, which Ramon Aytona challenged in his motion for reconsideration.

Aytona, a former representative of Feshan Philippines, was the lone private citizen charged with violation of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019) for the irregular procurement of 3,333 bottles of Bio Nature fertilizer by the Cagayan provincial government 20 years ago.

He was a co-accused of 12 ex-municipal officers, including former mayor Francisco Mamba Jr. and former vice mayor William Mamba, who were all cleared by the Supreme Court of graft charges in September 2022.

Court records showed the local officials purchased the liquid organic fertilizer at P1,500 per bottle for a total of P4,999,500 from Feshan in April 2004.

Graft probers said the transaction was marred by anomalies because Mamba and his co-accused resorted to direct contracting instead of the mandated public bidding, which was a violation of the Government Procurement Reform Act (RA 9184).

Moreover, the prosecution said the local officials failed to justify why they resorted to direct contracting, when there were no project proposals, reports, programs of work, a market survey of available fertilizers, or a certification stating that Feshan was the exclusive dealer of Bio-Nature.

In his appeal, Aytona said the SC ruling dismissing the criminal raps against all his co-accused due to inordinate delay should also be granted to him since he was implicated in the same case.

He cited a Sandiganbayan ruling in which a graft case against a private co-conspirator was ordered dismissed because the accused public officers were acquitted.

However, the Sandiganbayan countered that a private person like Aytona may still be prosecuted even if the conspirator, a public officer, could no longer be charged and consequently convicted, if the crime had not yet been extinguished and the basis of conspiracy had not been removed.

“In stark contrast, the cases against the accused public officers were dismissed either because of death or violation of their right to a speedy disposition of cases, neither of which delve into existence or non-existence of the crime and of the conspiracy,” said the Sandiganbayan, referring to its previous verdict that Aytona cited.