[av_one_full first min_height=” vertical_alignment=” space=” custom_margin=” margin=’0px’ padding=’0px’ border=” border_color=” radius=’0px’ background_color=” src=” background_position=’top left’ background_repeat=’no-repeat’ animation=”]
[av_heading heading=’ Sandiganbayan affirms Ejercito case dismissal ‘ tag=’h3′ style=’blockquote modern-quote’ size=’30’ subheading_active=’subheading_below’ subheading_size=’15’ padding=’10’ color=” custom_font=”]
BY ADRIAN STEWART CO
[/av_heading]
[av_textblock size=’18’ font_color=” color=”]
MANILA – The Sandiganbayan 6th Division affirmed the dismissal of the technical malversation charge against Sen. Joseph Victor “JV” Ejercito and several others for the purchase of high-powered firearms using calamity funds when he was still mayor of San Juan City.
In a decision released on Tuesday, the division denied the motion for reconsideration the Office of the Ombudsman filed against the decision to grant the demurrer to evidence filed by Ejercito and 14 others.
A demurrer to evidence is a motion to dismiss that is filed by the accused after the prosecution has finished presenting evidence. It is filed if the accused thinks that the evidence presented is insufficient.
Aside from Ejercito, also acquitted were Leonardo Celles, Andoni Miguel Carballo, Vincent Rainer Pacheco, Angelino Mendoza, Dante Santiago, Rolando Bernardo, Grace Perdines, Domingo Sese, Francis Keith Peralta, Edgardo Soriano, Jannah Ejercito-Surla, Francisco Javier Zamora, Ramon Nakpil, and Joseph Christopher Torralba.
The case stemmed from the alleged unlawful diversion of P2.1 million in calamity funds for the purchase of high-powered firearms for San Juan City’s police.
The Sangguniang Panlungsod approved City Ordinance No. 9 authorizing Ejercito to continue with the purchase of three K2 cal. 5.56mm sub-machine guns and 17 units of Daewoo K1 cal. 5.56mm sub-machine guns.
High-powered firearms “are not among the items contemplated for disaster relief and mitigation,” the Department of Budget and Management – Department of the Interior and Local Government Circular No. 2003-1 stated.
The Ombudsman questioned the spending, saying San Juan was not under a state of calamity at the time, there was not enough public bidding, and the bid documents were dated earlier than the publication of the invitation to bid.
But Ejercito said the city government bought the high-powered firearms as a deterrent to “the spike of criminal incidents within the metropolis, such as robbery-holdup, kidnap for ransom and gun-for-hire.”
The Commission on Audit did not issue a Notice of Disallowance to the San Juan City government then, proof that there was “no anomaly or malversation” in the transaction, he added./PN
[/av_textblock]
[/av_one_full]
