Bacolod Mayor Monico Puentevella has been a congressman for nine years but he still does not know what has authorized the Commission on Audit to demand for an accounting from him of the P50.5 million funds of the Bacolod Southeast Asian Games Organizing Committee or BASOC?

That was the reaction of Bacolod resident Sammy Montoyo of the Save Bacolod Movement of former congressman and now Mayor Puentevella’s statement that he does not know of any law that requires him to render an accounting of the BASOC funds.

In his reply affidavit, however, Montoyo cited Article IX of the Philippine Constitution that states: “The Commission on Audit shall have the power, authority and duty to examine, audit, and settle all accounts pertaining to revenue and receipts of, and expenditures or uses of funds and property owned or held in trust by, or pertaining to the Government for any of its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities, including government-owned and controlled corporations x x x x x”

Meanwhile, Montoyo is requesting the Ombudsman in the Visayas to suspend Puentevella pending the investigation of the case.

He also asked the Ombudsman to indict Puentevella on the crimes/offenses charged against him in the accusatory affidavit and that proper information be filed before the Sandiganbayan.

In September, the Ombudsman had ordered Puentevella to answer within 10 days the complaint filed by Montoyo for alleged malversation and technical malversation of the BASOC funds after finding enough basis to proceed with the criminal investigation of the charges against him.

In his counter-affidavit, Puentevella, who was then congressman, and was chairman of the BASOC in November 2005, when Bacolod City co-hosted the 2005 SeaGames, said the complaint is the third in a series involving the same issues and is a rehash of the earlier ones.

“Naturally, my counter-affidavit will be practically the same as the one I earlier filed for the earlier complaint,” Puentevella said.

NO LAWS?

Puentevella also said unless and until it is clearly shown and sufficiently established that there was a law or regulation that specifically requires him to render account of the P50.5 million released by the Philippine Sports Commission to the BASOC, he could not be held accountable for violation of Art. 218 of the Revised Penal Code.

In his reply affidavit, Montoyo said Puentevella’s defenses in his counter-affidavit are full of general denials and conclusions of law, especially in paragraph no. 7 where he seems not to know, or he seemingly plays ignorant by alleging that he (Montoyo) does not know how he (Puentevella) committed his misappropriation of public funds or his commission of malversation.

COA DEMANDS

Montoyo, however said Puentevella’s counter-allegations have never countervailed the specific allegations in the complaint that calls for his public accounting for the public funds under his control and custody pursuant to the demand made against him by the Commission on Audit in its demand letter and findings dated March 24, 2009.

In fact, the documentary annexes made by Puentevella in his counter-affidavit such as the letters dated Sept. 4, 2008 and Sept. 24, 2008 sent by PSC chairman William Ramirez and another letter dated Sept. 14, 2009 sent by COA chairman Reynaldo Villar, indicated that he had the public duty to make the proper accounting of the BASOC funds in his control and custody. Yet he was remiss in performing such accountability, Montoyo said.

Montoyo also said it is highly ridiculous for Puentevella, a former three-termer congressman, to claim that he does not know any law or regulation that requires him to render an accounting on the BASOC funds.

More preposterous was when he (Puentevella) deposited the P50.5 million BASOC funds to his RCBC personal and private bank account, thus, conclusively establishing the facts that he cannot anymore account for the total amount of P39,437,041.13 resulting to his crime of malversation of public funds, he said.

In his counter-affidavit, Puentevella said already knew since 2009 that a “plunder case” under OMB-V-C-14-0092 was filed against him, so why is he claiming in his defenses that the subject “rehash case” on public accountability was just acted on belatedly this 2014? Montoyo asked.

Montoyo recalled that during the 2013 campaign Puentevella had denied that a plunder case had been filed against him.

DISMISSED

He also pointed out that Puentevella stated his counter-affidavit that “The complaint that all the while has been regarded dismissed was suddenly resurrected.” Now, we may ask why Puentevella regarded his plunder case as a “dismissed” case?

Montoyo said there is no sense for Puentevella to further argue that in a span of five years since 2009 up to this time 2014, his plunder case filed by Philippine Sports Commission chairman Harry Angpin, or the cases for malversation be dismissed because there seems to be a factor of delay citing cases such as “Cosculluela vs Sandiganbayan”, etc.

Montoyo said Puentevella did not argue for his defense on his (Montoyo’s) prayer for his suspension so he must have waived his defense on his suspension.

Suspension is very much suitable to Puentevella, in as much as, he is “very dangerous” when it come to handling public funds, he said.

Montoyo also said that the subject crimes/offenses of Puentevella constitute dishonesty, grave misconduct and/or neglect in the performance of duty that would warrant removal from public service, hence he can then be put under preventive suspension pursuant to R.A. 6770, Sec. 24, or the Ombudsman Act of 1989.*CGS

back to top