Case Digest (G.R. No. 254125)
Facts:
Rogelim A. Cabrales and Noe Cabrido Gozalo, petitioners, v. The Ombudsman, Nahum E. Dosdos, Pascual R. Pongase II, and Raul P. Llagas, G.R. No. 254125, October 12, 2022, Supreme Court Third Division, Gaerlan, J., writing for the Court. The petition seeks review under Rule 45 of the August 30, 2019 Decision and August 10, 2020 Resolution of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 08750-MIN, which affirmed the Office of the Ombudsman (OMB) Decision dated September 20, 2017 (OMB-M-A-16-0262).Between November 2010 and May 2011, the Municipality of Tukuran, Zamboanga del Sur, procured one motor grader. The Purchase Request, signed by then Mayor Francisvic S. Villamero, specified a Chenggong MG1320C motor grader. Two entities bid: Eagle Equipment Company, Inc. (Eagle) and Ivan Carr Industrial Supply and Construction Inc. (Ivan Carr). The Municipal Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) calculated Ivan Carr as the Lowest Calculated and Responsive Bid and cleared it in post-qualification, after which the Municipality awarded and purchased the grader for P9,450,000.00.
Private respondents Dosdos, Pongase II, and Llagas filed complaints with the NBI alleging rigged bidding and overpricing; the NBI investigation found several irregularities (brand specified in Purchase Request, municipality unregistered with PhilGEPS, Eagle not SEC-registered, Ivan Carr using a residential address, and agency relationships among principals) and referred the matter to the OMB on June 22, 2016. The OMB docketed the administrative case as OMB‑M‑A‑16‑0262 and required counter-affidavits from the implicated municipal officials, including petitioners Cabrales (BAC member) and Gozalo (alternate BAC chairperson).
The OMB found Cabrales and Gozalo guilty of grave misconduct, ordered dismissal with accessory penalties, and found probable cause to charge them under Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019. On appeal, the CA (Aug. 30, 2019) affirmed the OMB as to the administrative liability, limited its review to the administrative aspect, rejected Gozalo’s invocation of the condonation doctrine, and sustained findings that the procurement violated various provisions of the 2009 GPRA IRR and the Government Procurement Reform Act (RA 9184). Petitioners filed this Rule 45 petition contesting the CA’s affirmation and the severity o...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Can petitioners invoke the condonation doctrine to absolve Gozalo of administrative liability for acts committed as an appointive official?
- Does Cabrales’ recorded individual vote favoring another bidder shield him from liability for an irregular BAC decision?
- Did the irregularities in the grader procurement justify findings of grave misconduct, or only simple misconduct?
- Do the Municipality’s lack of PhilGEPS registration and alleged unstable internet access excuse noncompliance with PhilGEPS registration requirements?
- Was publication of the Invitation to Bid in the Mindanao Gold Star Daily sufficient to meet the IRR requirement ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)