spot_img
28.1 C
Philippines
Saturday, April 20, 2024

QC dad sacked over 5 SALNs

- Advertisement -

A QUEZON City court has ordered a city councilor imprisoned for irregularities in his Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth as an incorporator of an entertainment company owned by singer-actress Jessa Zaragosa.

Branch 40 Judge Josephus Asis of the Metropolitan Trial Court convicted District 2 councilor Ranulfo Ludovica, the former chairman of Barangay Batasan Hills, for falsification of public documents and five counts of violation of Section 8 of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, or Republic Act No. 6713.

Ludovica was sentenced to imprisonment of four months to two years for the falsification case, and five years for each count of violation of RA 6713, or a total of 25 years.

Asis directed Ludovica to pay a P5,000 fine for each count of violation of the Code of Conduct, or P25,000 total.

The Office of the Ombudsman filed the charges, saying Ludovica falsified his 2005 SALN when he deliberately did not disclose his business interest in Jessa Zaragoza Phenomenal Entertainment.

- Advertisement -

In an interview, Ludovica denied any wrongdoing. 

“Yes, I used to organize concerts for different artists, and was part of the company, but I only signed once and had never attended any board meeting since then,” he told the Standard. “I was not even a barangay chairman when I joined the company.”

Based on the certification from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Ludovica was an incorporator, director and stockholder of the  corporation since 1999 with a subscribed and paid-up capital equivalent to P50,000.

Government prosecutors presented evidence that Ludovica failed to file his SALNs from 2002 to 2004 and from 2006 to 2007.

“Accused did not give any explanation nor presented anything in his defense [as to] why he failed to file his SALNs for five years,” the court’s decision read.

As far as Ludovica is concerned, he said he lost in the case not because of the merit of the case, but because of technicality over the failure his lawyer to attend hearings since “he was not able to receive summonses.”

“Nevertheless, I filed a motion for reconsideration to question the decision,” he said. 

- Advertisement -

LATEST NEWS

Popular Articles