The Sandiganbayan Fourth Division gave the Office of the Special Prosecutor five days to file its answer to the motion for reconsideration filed by the counsel of Bacolod Mayor Monico Puentevella in the graft case filed against the mayor involving alleged overpriced computer packages, during a hearing yesterday.

The Sandiganbayan issued a 90-day preventive suspension order against Puentevella last month directing him to cease and desist from exercising the functions and privileges of his office for 90 days immediately upon receipt of the resolution.

The graft case against Puentevella et al, stemmed from the alleged overpriced purchase of computers and software packages at P400,000 each, and worth P26 million in 2001 to 2006, funded from his Priority Development Assistance Fund, or pork barrel, during his incumbency as congressman of Bacolod City.

The purchase was allegedly also made without public bidding.

In his motion for reconsideration dated October 15, Puentevella represented by his lawyer Redemptor Peig, prayed that the court reconsider and set aside its resolution dated September 28 ordering his preventive suspension.

Peig also sought the consideration of the court not to rush its judgment on the validity of the information, so much so that this would cause irreparable damage to Puentevella.

He said the election fever in all parts of the country is already prevalent and that Puentevella has already filed his certificate of candidacy for mayor of Bacolod. His detractors are already on a binge of black propaganda against him in connection with the court's resolution on his preventive suspension, he claimed.

Peig said the validity of information against Puentevella is far from being settled since there is still a pending petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court assailing its validity.

The fact that that ten Supreme Court has not issued a temporary restraining order or a writ of preliminary injunction does not settle the issue on the validity of the information, he said.

Peig said the issuance of the order of preventive suspension is premature considering that the Supreme Court has not yet resolved Puentevella's petition for certiorari.

Sustaining the preventive suspension pending the resolution of the petition will only render the Supreme Court's resolution on the matter moot, not to mention the irreparable damage that Puentevella stands to suffer as a result of the preventive suspension, he said.

Peig said that sustaining the preventive suspension will only preempt the resolution of the Supreme Court on his petition.

He also asked that the court stay the preventive suspension of Puentevella and wait for the resolution of the Supreme Court on his petition for certiorari that ultimately settles the issue on the validity of the information.

The trial proper on the main case is scheduled on October 26 at 2 p.m. where the Prosecution will present evidence against Puentevella.

Earlier, the Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari with application for a temporary restraining order on the preventive suspension issued against Puentevella by the Sandiganbayan pending the investigation of his graft case.

Ralph Sarmiento, one of Puentevella's lawyers, said the TRO is already moot and academic and has already served its purpose. So, its denial has no effect on the Mayor's case.

Sarmiento said they filed the petition on October 1, just to prevent the Sandiganbayan and the Department of Interior and Local Government from immediately implementing the suspension order without first giving Puentevella the opportunity to file a motion for reconsideration and especially because he had allegedly not yet received a copy of the suspension order from them.

Sarmiento said that after the hearing of Puentevella's MR on the suspension order, they will wait for the resolution of the Sandiganbayan, and should it be unfavorable, then he could still question it at the Supreme Court by way of another petition for certiorari with application for TRO.*CGS

back to top