The Sandiganbayan has denied the plea of former Hinabangan, Western Samar Mayor Alejandro Abarratigue and his two co-accused to reopen their graft case to present additional evidence involving the alleged illegal lot purchase of the municipality in 2008.
In a resolution dated 28 February, the anti-graft court Third Division concurred with the prosecution that the period to reopen the trial already lapsed, citing Section 24 of Rule 119 of the Rules of Court providing that a case may only be reopened before a judgment of conviction is final.
“This case has already reached its finality as evidenced by the Supreme Court (SC) Entry of Judgment dated October 7, 2024,” the resolution reads.
Moreover, the court also took issue with the documents presented by the accused, asserting that it had nothing to do with the prayer to reopen the trial.
The Sandiganbayan sentenced Abarratigue and former municipal treasurer Raul Roberto Tapia and administrative officer II Analiza Mabonga Bagro to up to ten years in prison for one count of graft in November 2019.
The three were accused of acting in a conspiracy to purchase a lot amounting to P500,000 without the authority from the municipality’s Sangguniang Bayan in August 2008.
Investigation revealed that Abarratigue and his subordinates acquired the lot under the municipality to supposedly use as a public cemetery despite that there was no budgetary allotment for such.
In their motion, the three claimed that the transfer of the title under the municipality and the construction of the cemetery boxes in the subject lot “are supervening events that should lead to the reopening of the case.”
However, the Sandiganbayan cited the SC’s ruling on the case that states that the main fault of the three accused “was that they did not secure proper authorization from the Sangguniang Bayan to purchase the subject lot and that the person who received the funds was not authorized to receive the same.”
“The transfer of the title and the construction of the cemetery boxes were never issues in the original case or on appeal,” the anti-graft court said.
“Thus, the subsequent transfer of the title into the name of the municipality and the construction of the cemetery boxes do not change anything about the case,” it added.
Hence, the court noted the transfer of title and construction of cemetery boxes cannot cure the violations of Abarratigue and his subordinates.