COURT CONVICTS VITANGCOL OF GRAFT
THE Sandiganbayan has convicted former Metro Rail Transit Line 3 (MRT 3) General Manager Al Vitangcol 3rd and his uncle, project incorporator Arturo Soriano, of graft in the awarding of the MRT 3 interim maintenance contract in 2012.
The court’s Third Division found Vitangcol and Soriano guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
It ruled that Vitangcol “clearly gave unwarranted benefit and advantage to PH Trams” when he concealed the fact that Soriano was the uncle of his wife.
PH Trams refers to the Philippine Trans Rail Management and Services Corp.
Vitangcol said he would appeal the decision, calling it a miscarriage of justice.
The maintenance contract was awarded to PH Trams and venture partner Comm Builders and Technology Philippines Corp. (CB&T).
In the 2009 revised implementing rules and regulations of Republic Act
9184, or the “Government Procurement Reform Act,” relation by consanguinity or affinity up to the third civil degree to the head of the procuring entity, members of the Bids and Awards Committee (BAC), the technical working group, the BAC secretariat, the head of the “PMO” or the end-user unit and project consultants “shall automatically disqualify the bidder from participating in the procurement of contracts of the procuring entity.”
The court said Vitangcol was a member of the Department of Transportation and Communications’ (DoTC) task force in charge of post-qualifying the highest-ranked bidder for the maintenance contract. As a consequence, the group of PH Trams and CB&T “was able to participate in the negotiation stage and even secured” the contract.
It ruled that Soriano was Vitangcol’s relative by affinity within the third degree, being the brother of Vitangcol’s mother in- law.
The court added that Vitangcol “could have easily determined, with some reasonable due diligence, whether co-accused Soriano remained connected with PH Trams or had indeed divested himself of any interest therefrom.”
It also found Vitangcol and Soriano guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Section 65 paragraph C (1) of the Government Procurement Reform Act, in relation to Section 47 of its implementing rules and regulations.
It rejected the contention of Vitangcol that since he is not the head of the procuring entity, “he has no obligation somehow to disclose his relationship with accused Soriano.”
In both cases, the court sentenced each of the accused from six to eight years in prison, and perpetual disqualification from holding public office.
The court acquitted Vitangcol and Soriano of the charge of violation of Section 3(h) of the Anti-Graft Law.
The court said the relationship between Vitangcol and Soriano, who was “one of the incorporators of PH Trams, standing alone, does not necessarily mean that the former has financial or pecuniary interest with the latter.”
The court acquitted Wilson de Vera, Marlo de la Cruz, Manolo Maralit and Federico Remo — who, like Soriano, were incorporators of PH Trams — saying the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the other incorporators knew of the relationship between the Vitangcol and Soriano.
Associate Justice Bernelito Fernandez penned the decision, which was concurred in by Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice Amparo Cabotaje-Tang, who concurrently leads the court’s Third Division and by Associate Justice Ronald Moreno.
In an email to TheManilaTimes on Thursday, Vitangcol, also a columnist of the newspaper, said he would “exhaust all legal remedies” to overturn his conviction.
“Of course I will be exhausting all legal remedies available to overturn this miscarriage of justice,” he added.
Vitangcol said he was “convicted of a crime of which the law does not even punish.”
“The law prohibits the relationship (up to third degree) between the bidder and the head of the procuring entity (HOPE). I am not the HOPE, but a mere end user representative of the MRT 3. DOTC was the procuring entity at that time.”
He described the Sandiganbayan decision as “mere inferences and assumptions by the ponente.”
He said the court “ruled that there was no conspiracy between the other PH Trams incorporators but presumed conspiracy between me and Soriano.”
He added: “I never directed Soriano to join PH Trams. It was them (the other accused) who invited him, without my knowledge. Conspiracy can never be presumed but must be proven like the crime itself — beyond reasonable doubt.”