FORMER officials of the Technology and Livelihood Resource Center (TLRC) and private defendants have failed to persuade the Sandiganbayan to dismiss graft and malversation charges filed against them in 2019 in connection to alleged mishandling of P10 million in government funds.
In its resolution dated June 9, 2022 penned by Associate Justice Michael Frederick L. Musngi, the anti-graft court’s Second Division denied separate Motions for Leave to File Demurrer to Evidence filed by former TLRC director general Dennis Cunanan, legislative liaison officer Maria Rosalinda Lacsamana, and Corporate Support Services group manager Francsico Figura.
Similar pleadings made by Philippine Environmental and Ecological Development Association, Inc. (PEEDAI) chief executive officer Ike Suniel Canoy, chief operating officer Vincent Jaudian, vice president Alfredo Soriano, and treasurer Mercy Cabig were also turned down by the court.
“After a careful review of the records of the case and the evidence of the prosecution, the Court resolves to deny the separate motions filed by Canoy, Jaudian, Cabig, Soriano, Cunanan, Lacsamana, and Figura. The accused failed to show that the prosecution’s evidence are insufficient to establish a prima facie case against them,” the court ruled.
Second Division chairman Oscar C. Herrera Jr. and Associate Justice Arthur O. Malabaguio concurred.
Prosecutors alleged there was conspiracy among the TLRC and PEEDAI officials to defraud the government by funneling P10 million from the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) or pork barrel allocations of late Compostela Valley Rep. Prospero Amatong in 2013.
They noted that PEEDAI had doubtful credentials and was not accredited as a non-government organization as required under RA 9184 or the Government Procurement Reform Act but it was still chosen as a private partner organization to supposedly implement livelihood projects in the second legislative district of Compostela Valley province (now Davao de Oro).
Records obtained by Ombudsman investigators showed P9.8 million ended up with PEEDAI while P200,000 was retained by the TLRC as “service fee.”
However, the prosecution said the money simply disappeared as there was no real livelihood project in existence.
The defendants claimed the totality of the evidence presented was insufficient to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Likewise, they noted that no witness was presented to establish that the projects funded by Amatong’s PDAF did not exist.
At the same time, they argued that conspiracy among them was not established.
Prosecutors countered that the allegations in the information were fully backed by the Special Report No. 2012-03 issued by the Commission on Audit that documented irregularities in the utilization and releases of billions from lawmakers’ PDAF.
In denying the defendants’ motions, the court held that the grounds they raised in their motions are best appreciated in a full trial during the presentation of the defense’s presentation.
