THE Sandiganbayan has denied the most recent bid of Samuel Aloysius Jardin, former executive director of the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB), to get his graft case thrown out for supposedly being defective.
Associate Justice Sarah Jane T. Fernandez, Sixth Division chairperson, penned the 12-page resolution issued on July 4, that denied the defendant’s motion for reconsideration.
The case involves an allegation that Jardin requested and received P4.6 million in cash from one Michelle Sapangila who was applying for a certificate of public convenience (CPC) in 2018.
Jardin was appointed to the post on March 20, 2018 by then President Rodrigo Duterte but was suspended after serving just a year on orders of then Transportation Secretary Arthur Tugade. He was dismissed from government service by the Office of the Ombudsman on Dec. 22, 2020 after pronouncing him guilty of grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service. This was affirmed by the Court of appeals in a decision dated Sept. 20, 2022.
Jardin had challenged the validity of the case on the ground that the allegations did not constitute a criminal offense since the cases were based on records of investigations by the Department of Transportation (DOTr).
He pointed out that the same records included an affidavit from CPC applicant Sapangila who said that there was no money, black bag, or envelope involved hence the cases had no leg to stand on. Jardin added that Sapangila’s affidavit also did not mention a CPC but only a “route measured capacity or RMC” which is not the same as a permit or license.
The Sandiganbayan, however, said even if there was indeed an irregularity in the conduct of the preliminary investigation, the same will not render the information void or impair the validity of the case filed.
The court also noted that Jardin was given all the opportunity to respond to allegations and had in fact, actively participated in the preliminary investigation. He had also filed a motion for reconsideration when the Ombudsman issued a resolution dated Dec. 22, 2020 declaring the existence of probable cause for an indictment.
“In fine, the accused failed to convince this Court that the reversal of the assailed resolution is warranted. Wherefore, the accused’s motion for reconsideration is hereby denied for lack of merit,” the Sandiganbayan said.
