Ombudsman clears Gwen

CEBU, Philippines — The Office of the Ombudsman has dismissed the graft complaint filed against former Cebu governor Gwendolyn “Gwen” Garcia, and Shalom Construction Inc. general manager Anthony James Limchesing in connection with the desilting project of the Mananga River, ruling that there was no probable cause to indict them for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

On August 29, 2025, a resolution was issued by the Ombudsman’s special panel of investigators, which dismissed the complaint OMB-C-C-APR-25-0073. This complaint, filed by Moises Garcia Deiparine, accused Gwen of providing "unwarranted benefits, preference, or advantage" to Shalom Construction by issuing a special permit for desilting operations, allegedly without the necessary Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).

The resolution reads: “Wherefore, the criminal complaint in OMB-C-C-APR-25-0073 against respondents Gwendolyn F. Garcia and Anthony James Limchesing is dismissed for lack of probable cause.”

The ruling was signed by the panel of investigators, Graft Investigation and Prosecution members Corinne Joie M. Sarillo-Arellano, Ryan O. Silvestre, and Mark Angelo M. Dolci, with co-chairperson Mark Angelo Doro and Director Ryan Mendrado as chairperson. It was approved by Acting Ombudsman and Deputy Ombudsman for the Visayas Dante Vargas on 10 September 2025.

Deiparine, in his complaint, alleged that Gwen, then serving as Cebu governor, allowed the extraction of sand and gravel within a protected area in Talisay City, Cebu, supposedly under the guise of desilting the Mananga River. He claimed that the permit granted to Shalom Construction enabled the firm to conduct quarry-like operations without due environmental clearance.

The respondents were accused of violating Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019, which penalizes public officials who give unwarranted advantage to private parties through manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence.

Gwen, in her counter-affidavit, argued that the desilting activity was not a commercial quarrying operation but a collective inter-agency response to the severe drought caused by the El Niño phenomenon that hit Cebu from late 2023 to mid-2024.

She said the province had declared a state of calamity and convened key agencies, including the DENR, Metropolitan Cebu Water District (MCWD), local governments of Cebu and Talisay, and private contractors to address the province’s water crisis.

According to Gwen, the issuance of Special Permit No. 2024-09 to Shalom Construction was part of a broader effort to remove accumulated silt in the Mananga River to restore water flow and prevent further water supply disruption.

Gwen stressed that no government funds were spent on the desilting project. Instead, contractors were required to pay extraction and environmental fees to the provincial government, in line with Cebu’s 2008 Revenue Code.

She also denied extending any unwarranted favor to Shalom, emphasizing that several contractors, including QM Builders, Yukon Construction, and Socor, were invited to participate in the project under the same conditions.

She asserts that the decision to desilt the Mananga River was a collective choice made by all relevant agencies, rather than solely by her. She emphasizes that the desilting was necessary due to the Province of Cebu facing the El Niño phenomenon and being under a State of Calamity.

She further emphasizes that there has never been any quarrying operation conducted in the Mananga River, which is part of the Mananga Watershed Forest Reserve in the Province of Cebu. Furthermore, there has never been any commercial or large-scale extraction of sand, gravel, or other mineral resources in this area.

She explained that the process carried out was called "de-silting," which involves removing accumulated sediments or silt from water bodies such as rivers, canals, and reservoirs. The Mananga River is a protected area, so commercial activities like the extraction of sand and gravel are prohibited.

Limchesing, for his part, asserted that Shalom acted in good faith by following the legal directives issued by the provincial government. He emphasized that the company did not gain any unfair advantage from the permit and that it participated alongside other contractors involved in similar desilting activities.

He denied having any role in the provincial government’s decision-making, stressing that his involvement was limited to representing Shalom in executing the project.

After a review of the evidence, the Ombudsman found no sufficient basis to conclude that Gwen or Limchesing acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence, which are key elements required for a graft charge under RA 3019.

While the Ombudsman panel noted that the desilting project under Special Permit No. 2024-09 lacked a valid ECC at the time it was issued, it ruled that this lapse did not amount to criminal conduct.

It ruled that, even without an ECC, “such lapse, standing alone, is insufficient to support a finding of probable cause for violation of Section 3(e) of RA 3019,” emphasizing that good faith, not corruption, characterized the former governor’s actions.

The investigators observed that Gwen’s actions were motivated by the urgent need to address a water shortage and that there was no indication of corrupt intent or personal gain.

“The totality of the evidence demonstrates that respondent’s actions stemmed from an honest desire to address the water crisis being experienced in the province of Cebu,” the resolution stated.

The Ombudsman likewise found no proof of conspiracy between Gwen and Limchesing, pointing out that other contractors were also granted similar permits and that Shalom was not a favored contractor.

“There is utterly no evidence to support the conclusion that respondent Garcia exhibited any preference for Shalom, or that she handpicked the latter as the contractor for the desilting project,” the resolution further read.

Gwen’s reaction: “I would like to thank the good and decent men and women in the Office of the Ombudsman responsible for this decision.

“They thoroughly investigated and judiciously decided, steadfastly remaining true to their oaths to respect and uphold the law,” said the former governor in a statement.

Gwen said Deiparine was merely a hapless pawn used by more powerful forces that were obsessed with politically harming her. “Now he will have to face the consequences of his misdeed,” she said.

“In the end, let us always remember that there is an all-knowing, fair, and just God Almighty.

And no matter the malicious machinations of some who misuse their power, TRUTH and JUSTICE WILL ALWAYS PREVAIL,” the former governor added.

Deiparine in his Facebook post countered: “This Ombudsman bends the law.” He expressed his deep disappointment with the decision of the new Ombudsman in dismissing the case against the former governor.

“This decision undermines the sacrifices and efforts of those who courageously sought justice and accountability. It is disheartening to see that despite the truth and hard work we invested, fairness once again seems to have been set aside,” Deiparine added.

He said that he will be filing a motion for reconsideration on this latest Ombudsman ruling. — /RAE (FREEMAN)