G.R. No. 219598 & 220108, August 07, 2024
ARNOLD D. NAVALES, REY C. CHAVEZ, ROSINDO J. ALMONTE, AND ALFONSO E. LAID (G.R. No. 219598) / WILLIAM VELASCO GUILLEN (G.R. No. 220108), PETITIONERS, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioners were officials of the Davao City Water District (DCWD). Arnold D. Navales, Rey C. Chavez, and William Velasco Guillen were members of the Pre-Bidding and Awards Committee-B (PBAC-B), Rosindo J. Almonte was the Division Manager of the DCWD Engineering and Construction Department, and Alfonso E. Laid was the Assistant General Manager for Administration. The DCWD Board approved the Cabantian Water Supply System Project and authorized direct negotiation with Hydrock Wells, Inc. (Hydrock) for its initial well drilling phase, consisting of the VES 15 and VES 21 Projects. PBAC-B Resolution No. 05-97 dispensed with the advertisement requirement and instead invited accredited well drillers. Of the four invited, only Hydrock was available to undertake the projects immediately. PBAC-B Resolution No. 06-97 recommended awarding the project to Hydrock by negotiated contract. The DCWD board approved this and issued a notice of award on February 13, 1998. Petitioners were charged with violating Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) for allegedly giving unwarranted benefit to Hydrock by awarding the VES 21 Project through a negotiated contract without conducting the required open competitive public bidding and by allowing Hydrock to start work as early as December 29, 1997, before the official notice of award and notice to proceed were issued. The Sandiganbayan found them guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Petitioners filed these consolidated Petitions for Review on Certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether the Sandiganbayan erred in convicting petitioners of violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019.

RULING

No, the Sandiganbayan did not err. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The prosecution proved all elements of the crime under Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019: (1) petitioners were public officers; (2) they acted with evident bad faith and manifest partiality; and (3) their actions caused undue injury to the government or gave unwarranted benefits to Hydrock. The Court found that petitioners, by dispensing with the mandatory public bidding under P.D. No. 1594 and resorting to a negotiated contract without a valid legal basis (as there was no actual failure of bidding since no bidding was conducted), acted with evident bad faith. Their act of allowing Hydrock to commence work months before the issuance of the notice to proceed further demonstrated manifest partiality, granting Hydrock an unwarranted benefit and advantage. The defense of urgency and lack of qualified bidders was unavailing as the circumstances did not justify a departure from the required competitive public bidding. The petitions were denied, and the Sandiganbayan’s Decision and Resolution were affirmed.