Garcia to file case vs. complainant
COURTESY OF LONDON VILLARUEL
Cebu City Councilor Raymond Alvin Garcia will file a case for malicious prosecution against Emma Gabutan who filed a complaint against him and seven other members of the Sangguniang Panlungsod two years ago.
Gabutan filed a complaint against Garcia, Pastor M. Alcover, James Anthony R. Cuenco, Jose C. Daluz III, Joel C. Garganera, Jocelyn G. Pesquera, Eduardo R. Rama Jr., and Philip S. Zafra for Grave Misconduct, Gross Neglect of Duty, Inefficiency and Incompetence, Refusal to Perform Official Duty, and Violations of Republic Act (RA) No. 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees) and RA 7160 (Local Government Code) for their alleged deliberate refusal to attend a regular session of the Sangguniang Panlungsod last October 3, 2017.
In the letter sent to then Vice Mayor Edgardo Labella, Gabutan alleged that the respondent members of the Sangguniang Panlungsod manifested their refusal to attend the session allegedly to protest against the alleged disrespect and malice displayed by then Mayor Tomas Osmeña and his political party by callously calling for the resignation of their colleague, ABC Chairman Philip S. Zafra.
The Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas has asked the councilors last January 24, 2018 to submit their counter-affidavits.
In his counteraffidavit, Garcia said that he was on official leave, being appointed as the head of delegation to Kaoshiung Taiwan for the Eco Mobility World Congress.
“I felt slighted because I was on official travel, I was representing the city. In fact, the mayor authorized me to travel and represent him as the head of delegation,” said Garcia.
All respondents, except Cuenco who failed to file his affidavit, had submitted pieces of evidence to justify their absences in the October 3, 2017 council session.
Alcover, Garganera, Rama, Daluz and Zafra had filed for emergency or sick leave while Garcia and Pesquera were on separate official business abroad.
As Sangguniang Panglungsod members, it is their responsibility to attend regular sessions, but this does not prohibit them from taking a leave of absence.
The Ombudsman has dismissed the case against Garcia and his peers last August 14, 2018, after finding no substantial evidence against the respondents.
“Any member of the Sanggunian who incurred unauthorized absences for at least four (4) consecutive sessions are liable administratively pursuant to Article 124 (a) (6) of IRR of the Code,” the ruling read.
The anti-graft office had ruled that there was no evidence on record that their absence in the session has reached to four consecutive absences, thus the charges for RA 7160 and RA 6713 had no basis.
One of the requisites to file a malicious prosecution complaint, the prior case has to be dismissed by the Ombudsman. – Alicia Chua/GAN