THE Sandiganbayan has affirmed the conviction of former Bukidnon Rep. Candido Pancrudo on multiple criminal charges in relation to the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) or “pork barrel” scam even as it acquitted four of his co-accused on appeal.
In a 52-page resolution, the anti-graft court’s Fifth Division denied Pancrudo’s motion for reconsideration asking it to set aside its October 21, 2022 decision where he was convicted on two counts of violation of RA 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and two counts of malversation of public funds.
The former lawmaker was sentenced to a total of 29 to 41 years for all four charges after being found guilty in the fraudulent release of P8.2 million from his PDAF allocations between February and April 2009.
State auditors said P7.954 million was traced to have passed through the National Agri-Business Corp (Nabcor) before being transferred to Uswag Pilipinas Foundation Inc (UPFI), a non-government organization handpicked by Pancrudo as project partner.
Prosecutors said while the plan was to use the money for livelihood assistance to the poor residents of Bukidnon’s first district, verification showed this did not happen as the money instead were funneled to “ghost” or non-existent projects.
Although Nabcor finance director Rhodora Mendoza, Accounting Division officer-in-charge Maria Ninez Guañizo, and paralegal Victor Roman Cacal were also pronounced guilty of the same criminal offenses in the assailed decision, the Sandiganbayan granted their appeals and cleared them of any criminal liability together with private defendant Mark Espinosa who represented UPFI.
The reversal of conviction for the four was based on their challenge to the prosecution’s theory that they conspired with Pancrudo and Nabcor chief Allan Javellana who remains at large.
While noting that there were questions on the Nabcor officers’ actions in allowing the transfer of Pancrudo’s PDAF to an NGO without public bidding, the Sandiganbayan said it did not amount to a criminal offense.
“While this Court does not excuse the Nabcor officers’ manner of reviewing the support documents … it is our discerned opinion that their actions were not of such nature and degree as to be considered brazen, flagrant, and palpable to merit a criminal prosecution for [graft] and mal versation of public funds,” it said.
