Dark side of judicial system

Section 47 of Republic Act (RA) 9184, or the “Government Procurement Reform Act.” A scrutiny of these provisions will clearly show that the Sandiganbayan’s decision was defective and that the alleged criminal act does not fall within the ambit of the law. Section 47 of the said Act declares, “Section 47. Disclosure of Relations. — In addition to the proposed contents of the Invitation to Bid as mentioned under Section 21 of this Act, all bidding documents shall be accompanied by a sworn affidavit of the bidder that he or she or any officer of their corporation is not related to the by consanguinity or affinity up to the third civil degree. Failure to comply with the aforementioned provision shall be a ground for the automatic disqualification of the bid in consonance with Section 30 of this Act.”

On the other hand Section 65, paragraph (C1) of the same Act states,

“Section 65. Offenses and Penalties. — x x x;

“( c) Private individuals who commit any of the following acts, and any public officer conspiring with them, shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of not less than six (6) years and one (1) day but more than fifteen (15) years:

“1. Submit eligibility requirements of whatever kind and nature that contain false information or falsified documents calculated to influence the outcome of the eligibility screening process or conceal such information in the eligibility requirements when the information will lead to a declaration of ineligibility from participating in public bidding.”

The Sandiganbayan ruled that PH Trams submitted an eligibility requirement, their affidavit of disclosure, containing false information as it concealed my relationship with accused Soriano.

Ultra vires IRR

The Sandiganbayan relied on the provisions of Section 47 of the 2009 Implementing Rules and Regulations ( IRR) of RA 9184 mandating that, “all bids shall be accompanied by a sworn affidavit of the bidder that it is not related to the head of the procuring entity (HOPE), members of the BAC (Bids and Awards Committee), the TWG (technical working group), and the BAC secretariat, the head of the PMO ( Project Managemnt Office) or end-user unit, and the project consultants, by consanguinity or affinity up to the third civil degree.” in convicting me. This is utterly erroneous.

Thus, I was convicted of violating Section 47 of the IRR and not that of Section 47 of the law. This is ridiculous and a clear twisting of the meaning and intent of the law. Section 47 of the law specified the prohibited relationship only with the HOPE. Section 47 of the IRR expanded it to “members of the BAC, the TWG, and the BAC Secretariat, the head of the PMO or end-user unit, and the project consultants.” This is ultra vires (acting beyond one’s legal power or authority) and illegal. All convictions should be based on specific violations of the law and not on mere implementing rules.

The courts are fully aware that if there is a discrepancy between the law and the IRR, it is the law that prevails. This was made very clear by the Supreme Court:

“The implementing rules and regulations of a law cannot extend the law or expand its coverage, as the power to amend or repeal a statute is vested in the Legislature. Thus, if a discrepancy occurs between the basic law and an implementing rule or regulation, it is the former that prevails, because the law cannot be broadened by a mere administrative issuance. An administrative agency certainly cannot amend an act of Congress.”

Indeed, if there is a discrepancy between the law and the IRR, it is the law that prevails. This is a very basic legal precept, but for some unknown reasons the Sandiganbayan deviated from this. This is the dark side of our judicial system.

Let me end by quoting some lyrics from Alan Walker’s music, “Darkside”:

Give into the dark side Let go of the light Fall into the dark side.

xxx

Don’t wait for truth To come and blind us Let’s just believe their lies. www. nankamediaforum.com allinsight. manilatimes@ gmail. com