PB TINING’S P20M GRAFT CASE MOVES
Court denies Martinez’s motion for reconsideration for case dismissal for lack of merit
The Sandiganbayan has affirmed the indictment of Cebu Provincial Board Member Celestino “Tining” Martinez over the alleged misuse of P20 million in livelihood funds in 2006.
The anti-graft court’s 6th Division denied for want of merit Martinez’s motion for reconsideration, which sought to dismiss the graft case against him for inordinate delay.
The six years, eight months, and three days spent by the Office of the Ombudsman to complete the fact-finding investigation, preliminary investigation, and filing of case formation against Martinez “can hardly be considered an unreasonable and arbitrary delay as to deprive the accused of his constitutional right to the speedy disposition of his cases,” the Sandiganbayan ruled.
The case stemmed from the complaint that the Office of the Ombudsman filed against Martinez, and four others for violation of Sec. 3 (e) of Republic Act 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act before the Sandiganbayan.
Also named respondents were former Bogo City treasurer Rhett E. Minguez, former municipal accountant Cresencio Verdida, former municipal budget officer Mary Lou Ursal, and former assistant municipal treasurer Julio Ursonal Jr.
In 2007, the Department of Agriculture (DA) 7 transferred to Bogo (which was then a town) the P20 million for the Ginintuang Agrikulturang Makamasa (GAM) program.
The transfer was requested by Tining’s mother Clavel, who was then congresswoman of the fourth district, the ombudsman’s resolution stated.
Bogo, in turn, tapped the Bogo Municipal Employees Multi-Purpose Cooperative (BMEMPC) as its partner in implementing the program.
The two parties signed a memorandum of agreement (MOA) last Feb. 12, 2007.
Ursonal, apart from being the assistant municipal treasurer, was then the cooperative’s president and chairman.
Under Bogo’s agreement with the BMEMPC, the municipality transferred P20 million to the cooperative as “financial assistance for the purpose of extending sources of funds to all members who intend to establish livelihood projects or expand such projects.”
None of the assistance went to the farmers, fishermen and members of other marginalized sectors of Bogo, who should have been identified as program beneficiaries, the ombudsman said.
The resolution stated that the cooperative disbursed P10.3 million to 179 of its members in April and May in 2007 as “salary loans and without any declared livelihood or agricultural project, to elective officials and municipal employees.”
Martinez reportedly loaned P5.5 million for his fish and prawn pond; Ronie Tolingin borrowed P500,000 for his junk shop business; Adele Bendijo, P450,000 for her sari-sari store; Minguez, P1 million for his mango farm; and Josephus Montesclaros, P400,000 for his sari-sari store.
The other borrowers were Samson Lepiten, who loaned P400,000 for his micro-lending business; Sheila Orcullo, P500,000 for her soy sauce manufacturing business; Ursonal, P500,000 for his tricycle business; and Cesar Ylanan, P450,000 for his livestock business.
In their motion to dismiss, Martinez and Minguez asked the anti-graft court to dismiss the graft case against them, saying their right to a speedy trial had been violated.
They argued that it took the ombudsman five years and seven months, from the time they filed their counter-affidavits on April 13, 2010, to file the case last Nov. 15, 2015.
In his pleading, Martinez argued the fact-finding investigation and preliminary investigation of the Ombudsman, which lasted more than six years, was “unreasonable, oppressive, vexatious, and prejudicial.”
In the resolution, the Sandiganbayan found no “valid reason” to reconsider its resolution dated Aug. 24, 2017, which denied Martinez’s motion to dismiss case on the ground of violation of his right to speedy disposition of his cases.
Martinez’s arguments are “mere rehash and repetition” of the same issues he cited in his motion to dismiss, the anti-graft court pointed out. /