An Omnibus Motion to expedite the filing of information before the Sandiganbayan against Bacolod Mayor Monico Puentevella and his co-respondents with a motion for his suspension was filed by complainant-lawyer Joselito Bayatan before the Office of the Ombudsman Monday.

This is in relation to the case involving the purchase of alleged overpriced computers or Information Technology packages, where the Ombudsman has denied the motion for reconsideration filed by Puentevella seeking the reversal of its decision indicting him, Victorino Tirol, former regional director of the Department of Education Region VI, and Jessie Garcia, chairman of Merryland Publishing Corporation, in connection with the purchase of computers worth P25 million when the Mayor was still congressman.

Bayatan said the very jurisprudence that the camp of Puentevella is citing to protect his right to a pre-suspension hearing that could delay his temporary departure from office, is the same ruling that says that it is, in fact, "mandatory."

He, cited the prominent jurisprudence, "Segovia, et al versus Sandiganbayan, et al" ruling stating that "the mandatory suspension decreed by the act upon determination of the pendency in court or criminal prosecution for violation of the Anti-Graft Act or for bribery under a valid information requires, at the same time, that the hearing be expeditious, and not duly protracted such as to thwart the prompt suspension envisioned by the Act."

SEGOVIA JURISPRUDENCE

City Administrator Rolando Villamor, a member of Puentevella's legal team, had cited “Segovia et. al “ to stress that the mayor’s suspension is a distant possibility, Bayatan said.

In his motion, Bayatan said that the same Segovia case also demolishes the argument that Puentevella cannot be suspended because he is now mayor, and the purchase was made while he was still a congressman.

He said it does not matter that he is now the city mayor and was a congressman when the crime charged was committed because, under the same jurisprudence, one of the reasons for a public official’s suspension, even if his current position no longer pertains to his former official duties, is “to prevent the accused from committing further acts of malfeasance while in office.”

THE OMBUDSMAN KNOWS

Villamor, meanwhile, said Bayatan should not dictate upon the Ombudsman what to do insofar as the pending case is concerned. He should not push his luck too much, because the Ombudsman knows her job, he said.

He said Bayatan's move to press for the suspension of Puentevella shows that they are dictating upon the Ombudsman when, until now, there is no case filed against Puentevella. He added that the Ombudsman knows when to file the information, whether one reminds her or not.

"We are so prepared in case the information is filed before the Sandiganbayan,” he said, adding that they are capitalizing on his previous statement that the Mayor will not be suspended, which they misinterpreted.

RECONSIDERATION DENIED

In an eight-page decision on Jan. 7, 2014, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales denied the motion for reconsideration of Puentevella and two other officials, seeking the reversal of its Sept. 30, 2013 decision indicting them, and recommended that the case against the three officials be filed before the Sandiganbayan.

The case involved the alleged anomalous procurement of computers worth more than P25 million using Puentevella’s Priority Development Assistance Fund from 2002 to 2007 when he was a congressman.

But Bayatan said Villamor went into a media hype through broadcast and print media last week, stressing that his client, Puentevella, will not be suspended.

He also said it is under the same vein of the Segovia case that he promptly filed the Omnibus Motion, if only to disabuse the minds of Puentevella and Villamor, that they can belittle the resolution of the Ombudsman denying their motion for reconsideration.

TRIVIALIZING

Worse, he said, they are also trivializing the rules on suspension, by irreverently claiming that it will take more Decembers and many more years before the suspension happens to Puentevella.

Bayatan also quoted the jurisprudence of the Segovia case that states, "taking into consideration the public policy involved in preventively suspending a public officer charged under a valid information, the protection of public interest will definitely have to prevail over the private interest of the accused."

TWO DOCTRINES

The reason for the applicability of imminent suspension was emphasized twice, in the Bolastig Doctrine and in the Segovia Doctrine, he added.

There is therefore nothing to impede or hamper the authority and power of the Ombudsman to forthwith file an appropriate information against Puentevella, with the corresponding motion for his suspension from office, Bayatan said, citing the mandatory provision of R. A. 3019, Section 13,in his Omnibus Motion.

Villamor said that they should not be too in a hurry to prevent a fall.

He claimed that Bacolod Rep. Evelio Leonardia, whom he referred to as Bayatan’s boss, is facing six plunder cases which are not bailable.

The case that could be filed against the Mayor is bailable unlike the cases against his boss, Villamor said.

Bayatan said he filed the case to make the people of Bacolod fully aware that the case is in their favor because it is being elevated to the Sandiganbayan, and will now be titled “PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VERSUS MONICO PUENTEVELLA.”*CGS

back to top