In graft case filed by ex-Mayor Osmeña: Rama exonerated

CEBU, Philippines —  Citing lack of merit, the Office of the Ombudsman has dismissed the graft case filed by former mayor Tomas Osmeña against now Cebu City Mayor Michael Rama and other city officials.

In October 2016, Osmeña filed cases against Rama, among others, after being blamed for the delay in the construction of the Unit II building of the Carbon Public Market. In particular, he filed grave misconduct and violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

Based on previous reports, Osmena said the winning bidder, Geety Realty and Development Corporation, was unqualified and that the officials “conspired and connived” to award the P167 million Carbon Market Unit II project to it.

Prior to that, Osmeña also ended Geety’s contract with the city for the delay in the project completion.

Yesterday, the City Hall Public Information Office reported that lawyer Jocelyn Pesquera received the copy of the decision dismissing the case last Wednesday afternoon on behalf of her clients -- Rama and Rama’s chief-of-staff Atty. Dominic A. Diño.

Based the report, Ombudsman Samuel Martires approved on Nov. 8, 2021 the decision of assistant prosecutor Lyn Dimayuga to reverse an earlier decision supposedly indicting the city officials. At this time, the complaint against Andrea Tan of Geety Realty and Development Corporation was already dismissed.

A copy of the decision obtained by The FREEMAN showed that the motion for reconsideration filed by Rama, Diño, Rafael Christopher Yap, Jose Maria Poblete, Ester Concha and former councilor Jose Daluz III was granted. The other officials served either in the Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) or the Technical Working Group (TWG) created for the project.

With this, the case against them along with that of Eustaquio Batandolo Cesa and Alipio Navares Bacalso JR. had been dismissed for lack of merit.

Ombudsman cleared Rama and the other officials of any liability over the delay in the project by its contractor, Geety Realty and Development Corp. (GRDC), whose qualifications the complainant questioned.

In his motion filed on March 20, 2020, Rama said there was “no evidence that he acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence” when he approved the BAC recommendation to award the contract for the reconstruction of Carbon Market Unit II to GRDC.

“There was nothing irregular on the face of BAC Resolution No. 2013-03-07, nor on the Abstract of Bids, that would arouse suspicion,” Rama said.

Rama added that he relied on the BAC and the representation of the TWG on the project that all procurement procedures and regulations were complied with and that he did not gave no unwarranted benefits to the contraction with every aspect of the project monitors by the Office of the City Engineer.

Rama also noted that the Audit Observation Memoranda (AOM) used as basis for the filing of the complaint were addressed to then acting mayor Margarita Osmeña, and that he did not get any copy of the AOMs nor was he advised to attend the exit conference.

Instead, Rama said that Osmeña should be accountable for preventing the project from being completed in 2003.

Daluz, on the other hand, also argued that new evidence consisting of documents provided by COA be considered by the Ombudsman and that his signature did not appear in any documents pertaining to post-qualification.

Poblete, Diño and Concha said that invitation to apply for eligibility and to bid for the said project was also published in a local daily and bidders were also informed later that the bidding be put on hold for some time due to some legal issues concerning the said project.

After legal concerns were settled in February 2013, BAC notified all prospective bidders.

Poblete, Diño and Concha also contended that they relied in good faith on the post-qualification report of the TWG while also pointing out that the payments received by the contractor “were all commensurate with the work it performed and accomplished.”

Yap also assailed the findings that they acted in the conspiracy.

The Ombudsman, meanwhile, also saw no evidence that GRDC solely committed the delay, noting that the project got suspended on May 13, 2013 when the city used Unit II as a temporary evacuation center for the fire victims from Bato, Ermita.  -  JMD (FREEMAN)