Pichay out of the frying pan

Also acquitted from the graft charges were former LWUA senior deputy administrator Emmanuel Blancaflor Malicdem and former acting deputy administrator Wilfredo Manalili Feleo due to insufficiency of evidence

The country’s anti-graft court on Wednesday has acquitted former Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) acting board chair and now Surigao del Sur Rep. Prospero Pichay Jr. and two others of graft charges in the P1.5-milion sponsorship of a chess tournament by the Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) in 2010.

The Sandiganbayan has reversed itself and ordered the acquittal of Pichay, former LWUA acting deputy administrator for investment and financial services Wilfredo M. Feleo and former senior deputy administrator Emmanuel Malicdem.

Re considered by the anti-graft court was its 23 October 2020 decision which sentenced Pichay, Feleo and Malicdem to a prison term ranging from six to 10 years with perpetual disqualification from holding public office.

Pichay, a Deputy Speaker at the House of the Representatives, had been initially found guilty of violating Section 3(e) of Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and Section 7(a) of RA 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees.

In a resolution issued last 1 March and written by Associate Justice Maryann E. Corpus-Mañalac, the Sandiganbayan said there was nothing on record that would show that the 2010 sponsorship grant to the National Chess Federation of the Philippines (NCFP) in 2010 was disallowed by the Commission on Audit (CoA).

A Credit Notice dated 28 April 2010 was presented by the three before the Court that “has been audited” and that “credit to the cash advances is allowed.”

“Clearly, a credit notice gives a certain level of assurance that the expenditure covered thereby is lawful and, therefore, creates a reasonable expectation that subsequent similar expenditures are also lawful,” the latest resolution said. “The foregoing lends support to the claim that the accused believed that the 2010 sponsorship request will also have the same treatment and approval by CoA.”

“There is likewise no showing of the CoA disallowance of the subject 2010 sponsorship grant to NCFP. Additionally, the amount released as sponsorship grant was part of the budget allotted for sponsorship of sports events provided for in the 2010 LWUA Corporate Operating Budget,” it added.