G.R. No. 141284 - Integrated Bar of the Philippines vs. Zamora

Petitioners Arnold D. Navales, Rey C. Chavez, Rosindo J. Almonte, Alfonso E. Laid, and William Velasco Guillen were officials of the Davao City Water District (DCWD).

Navales, Chavez, and Guillen were members of the Pre-Bidding and Awards Committee-B (PBAC-B).
Almonte was Division Manager of the DCWD Engineering and Construction Department.
Laid was Assistant General Manager for Administration.

In November 1997, the DCWD Board approved the initiation of the Cabantian Water Supply System Project, with a budgetary cost of PHP 33,200,000.00, including a drilling phase authorized to be directly negotiated with Hydrock Wells, Inc. (Hydrock).
The drilling phase involved two well projects: VES 15 and VES 21, estimated at PHP 4,000,000.00 each.
Hydrock expressed readiness to undertake the projects immediately pending approval.
The PBAC-B dispensed with the advertisement requirement for bidding and invited accredited well drillers to participate. Of four invited, three responded; two requested project delays due to equipment unavailability.
PBAC-B recommended awarding the contract to Hydrock through negotiated contract based on company track record, efficiency, urgency, and pricing.
DCWD Board ultimately approved and awarded the projects to Hydrock in February 1998. Hydrock commenced works before official notices of award and proceed.

In 2005, complaints were filed against petitioners for violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) for bypassing the required public bidding in awarding the projects.
Amended Information was filed specifically addressing the VES 21 Project, charging conspiracy, evident bad faith, and manifest partiality in favoring Hydrock by awarding through negotiated contract without public bidding.
Petitioners pleaded not guilty and contended exceptions to public bidding such as urgency, lack of qualified bidders, and failure of bidding.

The prosecution presented witnesses and documentary evidence showing that petitioners invited only accredited drillers instead of publishing for public bidding and allowed Hydrock to commence early.
Sandiganbayan convicted petitioners in 2015, finding that petitioners acted with bad faith and partiality in awarding contract without proper bidding and awarding Hydrock unwarranted benefits.
Sentenced to imprisonment and perpetual disqualification from public office.

Sandiganbayan denied motions for reconsideration and motions to reopen the case.
Petitioners filed Petitions for Review before the Supreme Court, arguing failure of prosecution to prove crime beyond reasonable doubt and that their role was recommendatory.
In separate administrative case (G.R. Nos. 194763-64), the Supreme Court found petitioners guilty only of simple neglect of duty due to failure to strictly comply with procurement law but dismissed grave misconduct for lack of evidence of corruption or bad faith.
Petitioners argued violation of their right to speedy disposition of cases, citing the delayed filing of charges.
The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) maintained the Sandiganbayan ruling, asserting bad faith by PBAC-B in recommending negotiated contracts without urgency.

Whether petitioners' right to speedy disposition of cases was violated.
Whether petitioners' conviction for violating Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 was proper, considering the facts and evidence presented.
Whether the non-observance of public bidding in awarding the VES 21 Project constituted evident bad faith or manifest partiality under Section 3(e).
Whether petitioners' actions caused unwarranted benefits, preference, or advantage to Hydrock Wells, Inc.