Hole of Justice
by Peter G. JimeneaThe Ombudsman-Visayas
Sus gino-o, are they really sincere to gather evidence to discipline that erring driver? Will they exert efforts in doing so when there are still unresolved big cases pending at their office? Perhaps, Deputy Ombudsman Pelagio Apostol should tell his people to shut up!
They cannot even probe the involvement of former mayor, now Cong. Jerry Trenas in the Pavia Housing case filed at their office eight years ago. Funny indeed, because former Mayor Mansueto Malabor widely believed the lesser evil in this case was the one indicted.
Under Mayor Trenas, the P137M for 413 units of low-cost houses for poor City Hall employees were spent without a unit completed. Worse, the P125M loan from PNB to finance the project was suddenly transferred to PVB, incurring a P12M expense for documentation (kuno), thus, increasing our obligation to 137M.
Probable cause needs only to rest on evidence showing that more likely than not, a crime has been committed. The evidence of unauthorized payments is embraced in RA 3019 and can lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense charged has been committed.
The task to further investigate the involvement of Cong. Trenas was handed down to Apostol six months ago. Yet, the case that had consumed the city for eight years seems not good for the court. Thus, it creates public suspicion that this runaround of the Pavia Housing case by the Office of the Ombudsman is done in exchange for – you know what!
Now an official from the Ombudsman-Visayas brags to probe the misuse of that government vehicle. Oh my God, what a false impression of a speedy disposal of cases when this Pavia Housing Scam is a story of delay-in-eternity. Injustice lies fairly in “delayed” decision than “erroneous” that can be appealed immediately.
The bond posted by the contractor equivalent to the monetary award was not confiscated when the contractor abandoned the project. The mayor ignored the resolution passed by the city council urging him to rescind the contract and sue the contractor. On why, he has yet to say.
But Art. 1191 dictates, “the mayor has the power to rescind the contract in case one of the obligors cannot comply with what is incumbent upon him.” Yet, the mayor continued paying the contractor’s billings in millions despite the rusting project abandoned by the latter. Oh my God, there’s no probable cause still?
The employees at the Ombudsman-Visayas Office should know that it is only for them and the government crooks that what they did was good. Lowly city hall employees are most sorely tempted to steal but don’t, what a tolerance. But Dirty Harry says, they who profit from this mess must tolerate brave words to save face!
No comments:
Post a Comment