Sandiganbayan junks charges vs Bacolod mayor

The Office of the Ombudsman’s failure to observe Bacolod City Mayor Evelio R. Leonardia’s right to speedy trial has prompted the Sandiganbayan to junk the graft charges filed against him and several co-accused.

The Sandiganbayan Fourth Division upheld the motion to dismiss the case filed by Leonardia and her co-accused who assailed the Ombudsman for virtually sitting on the case by conducting preliminary investigaiton that lasted over five to eight years.

In a resolution penned by Associate Justice Alex Quiroz, division committee, the anti-graft court also cleared Leonardia’s co-accused, namely Goldwyn V. Nifras, Luzviminda S. Treyes, Nelson M. Sedillo Sr., Belly P. Aguillon, Eduardo H. Ravena, Aladino A. Agbones, Jaries Ebenizer Encabo and Melvin Recabar.

All of the accused have been charged with one count of violation of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act for the alleged 2008 anomalous procurement of R49 million worth of furniture and fixtures for Bacolod City’s New National Government Center.

The Ombudsman filed the information of the case only Dec. 4, 2017.

The anti-graft prosecutor also ordered Leonardia’s dismissal after finding him guilty of grave misconduct and gross neglect of duty before it was reversed by the Court of Appeals in September, 2017.

Leonardia, a former congressman, asked the Sandiganbayan to dismiss the case for violation of his constitutional right to speedy disposition of case. His co-accused followed his lead.

“The accused cited several grounds for their motion, but the principal basis for the dismissal sought is anchored on Section 14 (2) of the bill of Rights on the right of an accused to speedy disposition of cases,” the Sandiganbayn said in the three paged resolution.

In upholding Leonardia’s motion to dismissed, the Fourth Division stated that the conduct of a fact finding investigation should not be deemed separate from the preliminary investigation as the court attempts to determine whether or not the delay had indeed violated the constitutional right of the accused.

Citing the Supreme Court ruling in Torres vs Sandiganbayan, the anti-graft court said it was ruled that a total of five years and five months spent conducting both the fact-finding investigation and preliminary investigation already “constitute inordinate delay.”

In the Leonardia et. al. case, the Ombudsman spent eight years and two months to conduct preliminary investigation and fact-finding probe.