Junjun Binay seeks dismissal of P2.2-billion Makati carpark raps

MANILA, Philippines — Former Makati mayor Jejomar Erwin "Junjun" Binay Jr. has again asked the anti-graft court Sandiganbayan to dismiss his criminal cases in connection with the alleged anomalous construction of the P2.2-billion Makati City Hall Building II.

In his 14-page motion filed on January 3, Binay Jr., through his lawyers, asked the court's Third Division to quash his two counts of graft and one count of malversation of public funds claiming that the facts stated in the case information sheets “do not constitute an offense.”

“Considering that there are no crimes or offenses that can be ascribed to the Accused in all the [case] informations, it should not be difficult to ascertain that there are actually no crimes that can be proved in court...Hence, the State should be saved the trouble of prosecuting innocent persons like the Accused,” Binay Jr.'s motion read.

Binay Jr. is named as co-accused of his father, former vice president Jejomar Binay Sr., in two counts of graft and one count of malversation for phase three of the construction of the P2.2 billion Makati City Hall Building II, also referred as the Makati parking building.

The Third Division had earlier dismissed Binay Jr.'s motion to quash his two counts of graft and six counts of falsification for phases four and five of the construction of the parking building, in which he was named as the primary accused.

Binay Sr., who was the predecessor of the younger Binay as Makati mayor, is facing nine counts of falsification of public documents, four counts of graft and one count of malversation of public funds for phases one, two and three the project.

Filed by the Office of the Ombudsman in last year, all the cases stemmed from the alleged anomalous award of architectural design and construction contracts to Mana Architecture and Interior Design, Co. (MANA) and Hilmarc’s Construction Corporation, respectively, for the parking building project.

The ombudsman said the contracts were awarded through “simulated bidding” despite the absence of approved budget appropriation, project plan and specifications.

In his motion, Binay Jr. said he should not have been charged with malversation in connection with architectural design and phase three of the construction as he did not have direct control or access to the funds for the project.

Binay Jr. said he merely continued the obligation of paying Mana for its architectural design for the project as the contract was already entered into even before he was elected as mayor in 2010.

“In the instant case, Accused Binay Jr. cannot be said to have committed the unlawful act of malversing public funds considering that all he did was pay the obligation already incurred by the City of Makati under a contract that was entered into even before he became Mayor, which was valid and subsisting during his term,” Binay Jr.'s motion read.

“Hence, had accused Binay Jr. not honored the payment of a valid and subsisting obligation, he would have exposed Makati City to liability for damages,” it added.

Binay Jr. further argued that while the ombudsman alleged that he signed several documents in connection with the architectural design and construction of the parking building, it failed to show that the actions were done with a “dishonest purpose” or with a “degree of partiality, bad faith or gross negligence” that constitute a graft offense.

Binay said the ombudsman also failed to identify his specific actions showing that he conspired with his father and the other accused in the cases.

“It should be noted that other than the plain, baseless and hollow allegation that Accused Binay Jr. conspired with the other co-accused, there is nothing on the face of the said [case] Informations, which specifically points out to any act of conspiracy,” the motion read.

The Third Division had tentatively set the arraignment of the Binays and the other former Makati City officials named as respondents in the cases on January 12.