THE Sandiganbayan has thrown out a graft case filed by the Office of the Ombudsman last year against incumbent Catanduanes Gov. Joseph C. Cua and a private businessman for lack of jurisdiction.
In a seven-page resolution penned by Associate Justice and Seventh Division Chair Ma. Theresa Dolores C. Gomez-Estoesta, the anti-graft court dismissed the case motu proprio without any prompting from the defense since the information failed to cite the amount involved.
Associate Justices Zaldy V. Trespeses and Georgina D. Hidalgo concurred that the Sandiganbayan cannot take cognizance of the case unless the amount involved is P1 million or higher as provided under RA 10660, which amended the exclusive original jurisdiction of the special court.
“Where no allegations of any damage to the government is found in the information in the threshold amount of at least P1,000,000, the court is constrained to dismiss the case for want of jurisdiction,” the court declared.
However, the dismissal does not mean Cua and Rodriguez were completely off the hook as the court held the Ombudsman has discretion whether to pursue the case or not.
It ordered the records returned to the Ombudsman “for appropriate action and disposition.”
Based on the indictment, Cua was accused of causing undue injury to the provincial government when he allegedly allowed private defendant Eulogio R. Rodriguez’s firm E.R. Construction to use a government property located in Sta. Elena, Virac, Catanduanes free of charge in 2017.
Prosecutors said E.R. Construction used the provincial property to construct bunkhouses, park its vehicles, and stockpile construction materials.
However, prosecutors failed to assign a specific amount relative to the allegation of undue injury.
Since RA 10660 took effect in 2015 or two years before the alleged commission of the offense, the Sandiganbayan said the transitory provision of the amending law must apply.
The amendatory provisions gave regional trial courts jurisdiction over cases involving amounts less than P1 million.
“The information is bereft of any allegation that the alleged acts of the accused caused any amount of damage to the government amounting to at lest P1,000,000. The patent lack thereof outrightly stripped this court of its jurisdiction,” the Seventh Division said.
It clarified that the prosecution should have at least quantified the damage supposedly caused on the government and included it in the information.
