Former general manager Al Vitangcol III of the Metro Rail Transit 3 has asked the Sandiganbayan to challenge Transportation Secretary Joseph Emilio Abaya to explain why he was spared from the graft charges over the MRT maintenance contract mess.
In a motion, Vitangcol asked the Third Division to order the Office of the Ombudsman’s Office of the Special Prosecutor to produce material evidence regarding the acquittal of the other officials of the Department of Transportation and Communications.
Vitangcol appealed to the government prosecutors to provide him with authenticated copies of the counter-affidavits of Abaya and the other personalities who had been cleared of the MRT deal mess.
He urged the anti-graft court to furnish him with Abaya’s counter-affidavit so he would know the grounds of Abaya’s acquittal.
According to Vitangcol, there were 15 DoTC officials included in the preliminary investigation of the Ombudsman in the supposed questionable awarding of MRT-3 maintenance deal.
Despite such, those investigated were spared from the charges, he said.
“During the preliminary investigation conducted by the Office of the Ombudsman, 15 other officials of the Department of Transportation and Communications were initially charged but were subsequently acquitted except for accused Vitangcol,” the motion read.
Those cleared of the graft charges were Abaya, Assistant Secretaries Ildefonso Patdu and Dante Lantin, and Undersecretaries Rene Limcaoco, Jose Perpetuo Lotilla and Rafael Antonio Santos.
“The Ombudsman deliberately and maliciously withheld the said affidavits, all to the detriment of the herein accused,” Vitangcol told the court.
“Said affidavits would show the innocence of accused Vitangcol and negate the wrongful accusations of the Ombudsman.”
Abaya and five incorporators of Philippine Trans Rail Management and Services Corp. are facing charges of violation of Sections 3 (e) and 3 (h) of Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and Section 65 of Republic Act 9184 or the Government Procurement Reform Act in connection with the alleged anomalous awarding of MRT-3 maintenance contract in October 2012.
Vitangcol said transportation legal officer Geronimo Quintos, in a counter-affidavit, maintained the DoTC-MRT 3 negotiating team was created pursuant to a resolution approved by the DoTC-BAC and that “Vitangcol did not dictate the composition of the Negotiating Team.”
He alleged negotiating team members Misael Narca, Joel Magbanua, Arnel Manresa and Natividad Sansolis, in their respective affidavits, also claimed he had “no hand” in the creation of the Task Force ordered to study the MRT-3 maintenance project and that the Task Force’s report embodied in Memorandum dated Oct. 8, 2012 recommending the awarding of the project to PH Trams CB&T was submitted as a report of a collegial body.
Meanwhile, the Public Attorneys’ Office said it is willing to defend Vitangcol in the graft suit arising from the MRT mess.
PAO chief Persida Acosta said it is up to the anti-graft court to decide whether or not the agency can represent Vitangcol before the Third Division.