Title
Roxas vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 223654-55
Decision Date
Jul 14, 2021
Former Pasay City Councilor Roxas convicted for improper contract awarding to Izumo, violating anti-graft laws, despite PBAC dissolution under RA 9184.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 223654-55)

Applicable Law

The case involves the violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019, known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, and Article 237 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). The relevant procurement law is Republic Act No. 9184, also known as the Government Procurement Reform Act.

Antecedents of the Case

The charges arose from allegations that Roxas and Trinidad illegally reconvened the former Pre-Qualification Bids and Awards Committee (PBAC) to conduct a public bidding while knowing that a new Bids and Awards Committee (BAC) had been established under RA 9184. The prosecution contended that Roxas and Trinidad's actions demonstrated manifest partiality, evident bad faith, and gross inexcusable negligence, effectively leading to unwarranted benefits for Izumo Contractors, Inc.

Prosecution's Case

The trial included testimonies from multiple witnesses, including Graft Investigation Officer Luisito S. Suarez and City Treasurer Concepcion C. Daplas. They established that the bidding process did not comply with the necessary public procurement regulations and that the former PBAC had been dissolved before the bidding occurred.

Sandiganbayan's Ruling

On November 26, 2015, the Sandiganbayan found Roxas and Trinidad guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the charges against them and sentenced them to imprisonment and perpetual disqualification from public office. The court ruled that their actions constituted corruption and an abuse of authority as they continued to exert powers beyond their authority as members of a defunct committee.

Motions for New Trial

After the decision, Roxas filed an Omnibus Motion for a new trial and reconsideration, claiming that his previous counsel's errors deprived him of his opportunity to defend himself effectively. The Sandiganbayan denied this motion, asserting that Roxas was informed of the legal processes and voluntarily participated in the trial.

Court’s Analysis of Motions

The Supreme Court upheld the Sandiganbayan’s decision, emphasizing that Roxas's participation in the proceedings and the ability to file a demurrer to evidence indi

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.