G.R. No. 239416 - Chipoco vs. Office of the Ombudsman

Title: Chipoco vs. Office of the Ombudsman

Case: G.R. No. 239416

Decision Date: Jul 24, 2019

Local officials accused of sham bidding and falsifying documents in the purchase of a vehicle, violating anti-graft laws; Ombudsman's probable cause finding upheld by the Court.

Font Size:

Dark Mode

Case Digest (G.R. No. 239416)
Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

Transaction History and Vehicle Sale

On November 26, 2010, then Mayor Wilfredo S. Balais sold his 2001 Nissan Patrol Wagon to Eduardo A. Ayunting for P500,000.00.

On January 28, 2011, Ayunting sold the subject vehicle to the local government unit (LGU) of the Municipality of Labason, Zamboanga del Norte, represented by then Vice Mayor Virgilio J. Go for P960,000.00.

Legislative and Administrative Actions

On August 1, 2011, the Sangguniang Bayan of Labason passed Resolution No. 117 authorizing Mayor Balais to negotiate the rescission of the contract of sale, on the ground that the purchase price was excessively high and disadvantageous to the government.

This action set the stage for subsequent administrative and judicial scrutiny regarding the propriety of the sale.

Initiation of Complaints and Investigative Proceedings

Roberto R. Galon filed a Complaint-Affidavit on August 22, 2011 with the Ombudsman against several municipal officials, including petitioners, charging violations of:

R.A. No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act)

R.A. No. 9184 (Government Procurement Reform Act)

Government Auditing Rules and Regulations

R.A. No. 6713

Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC)

Presidential Decree No. 1829

Additional parties were impleaded, ranging from municipal officials to members of the Sangguniang Bayan.

Subsequent Evidence and Additional Complaint-Affidavit

During the pendency of related proceedings (case docketed as OMB-M-C-11-0356-1), the Ombudsman found probable cause against Balais, Go, and Ayunting for violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019.

While the case was ongoing, Ayunting turned state witness and supplied a set of documents which led to a second Complaint-Affidavit, filed on February 5, 2016, to hold additional local government officials liable as conspirators in the alleged irregularities.

Charges, Issuances, and Petition for Certiorari

On December 8, 2017, the Ombudsman issued a Resolution charging petitioners with:

Violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 concerning sham bidding in the sale of the motor vehicle.

Violation of Article 171(2) of the RPC for falsification of public documents (including the Notice of Award, the Minutes of Opening of Bids, and the Abstract of Bids as Read).

Petitioners, including Chipoco, Balais, Sabijon, Villamil, Antoque, and Eslabon, filed an Urgent Motion for Reconsideration regarding the Resolution, which was subsequently denied.

The petition at hand challenges both the Resolution and the Order issued on March 5, 2018 by the Ombudsman, with petitioners alleging grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.

Issue:

Whether the Ombudsman committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in:

Ruling that the BAC (Bids and Awards Committee) members granted unwarranted benefits to Ayunting/Oro Cars despite the absence of evidence showing receipt of any such benefits.

Refusing to dismiss the complaint on the basis of the rescission of the contract of sale as authorized by Sangguniang Bayan Resolution No. 117.

Charging petitioners with falsification of public documents, despite contentions that the factual record and testimonies did not support such charges.

Ruling:

(Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

(Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

(Subscriber-Only)

Unlock Full Case Digest

END