By NITZ ARANCON
FORMER Mayor Vicente and other former city hall officials have to meet two deadlines of submission of their counter-affidavits in connection with graft complaints filed against them before the Office Ombudsman.
The ombudsman has ordered Emano along with other former city hall officials and businessman Edgay Dy to submit their counter-affidavits within 10 days from their receipt of the order.
The order, dated Sept. 14, was signed by Hilde dela Cruz-Likit, a graft investigator officer of the Office of the Ombudsman.
“Failure to file their counter affidavit within the aforesaid period shall be deemed a waiver of their rights to submit controverting pieces of evidence and the investigation shall proceed accordingly,” dela Cruz-Likit wrote in the order.
The order stems from the complaint filed by Ernesto Molina who accused Emano and others of violating the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Law.
Molina also filed administrative charges against Emano and others for grave misconduct and for violation of RA 6713.
Molina accused Emano, Federico Gempesaw, former city treasurer Merlyn Legaspi, former city accountant Wilma Rugay, and former city budget officer Gresilda Joson of collusion in buying some P5 million worth of seeds from Cagayan Diversified Trading owned by Dy.
He alleged that Emano and others used the city’s calamity fund to purchase the seeds from Dy’s store without going through the legal process at a time when there was no disaster in the city.
The Office of the Ombudsman also ordered Emano, Legaspi, Rugay, Joson, and Carlos Soriano to submit their counter-affidavits in connection with a different complaint filed also by Molina.
Molina accused Emano and others of colluding with Soriano, president of Kaagapay Magpakailan Foundation Inc., to launch a meat processing livelihood project that amounted to P4 million.
Molina alleged that in reality there was no meat processing livelihood project.
The order, dated Sept. 17, was signed by Marco Anacleto Buena, director for Preliminary Investigation, Administrative Adjudication, and Prosecution Bureau of the Office of the Ombudsman.
“No motion to dismiss, motion for the bill of particulars, or other dilatory motion shall be entertained,” Buena stated.
Like in his other complaint, Molina accused Emano and others of violating Article 217 and 218 of the Revised Penal Code and Section 3(e) of Republic Act 3019 and in violation of Section 3(e) of RA 3019.