FORMER Caloocan City mayor Enrico Echiverri and two of his co-defendants have been acquitted by the Sandiganbayan of 13 counts of graft and 13 counts of falsification of public documents in connection with alleged irregularities attending flood control, road maintenance, and beautification projects totaling P38.97 million in 2012.
In a 70-page decision issued last October 14, the anti-graft court granted the demurrer to evidence filed by the three accused citing insufficiency of government evidence to prove the key elements of the offenses charged.
The court said the prosecution failed to discharge its duty to prove all the elements of the criminal offense and that these were committed by the defendants.
“The Court finds that the prosecution has failed to discharge the said burden. Thus, the Court is constrained to grant the accused’s demurrer to evidence for lack of sufficient evidence to warrant their conviction,” the Sandiganbayan said.
Also acquitted were former city accountant Edna Centeno and city budget officer Jesusa Garcia.
Presiding Justice and Third Division chairperson Amparo M. Cabotaje-Tang penned the ruling, with Associate Justices Bernelito R. Fernandez and Ronald B. Moreno concurring.
The case information filed by the Office of the Ombudsman in 2017 alleged that the former city officials favored certain contractors and caused undue injury to the city government by awarding the contracts for road construction, drainage repair, and street lighting despite supposed lack of appropriation from the Sangguniang Panlungsod.
In granting the demurrer to evidence, the Sandiganbayan gave greater weight to the pronouncements of the Commission on Audit en banc that Echiverri had sufficient authority to transact and approve the contracts despite lack of specific authorization from the city council.
The court noted the COA’s finding that the Sangguniang Panlungsod allocated funds for various city development projects hence there was no question that there were adequate funds for the awarded projects.
At the same time, it pointed out that the Office of the Ombudsman made no imputation of any irregularity in the conduct of public bidding relative to the projects.
