Omb
Omb
Omb
________________________,
________________________,
________________________,
________________________,
Complainants,
OMB Case No.
- Versus -
For: Violation of the Anti-Graft
and Corrupt Practices Act.
Direct and Indirect Bribery
Under Articles 210 and 211
of the Revised Penal Code
(Criminal Offenses)
Malfeasance, Dishonesty,
Grave Misconduct
(Administrative Offenses)
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DELILAH
F. DELES,
Deputy Commissioner of the
NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION (NTC) and concurrently
The REGIONAL DIRECTOR, NTC,
National Capital Region,
Respondent.
X * * * * * * * * X
COMPLAINT – AFFIDAVIT
PREFATORY STATEMENT
3.3. That for the span of about six (6) years reckoned from the time
respondent assumed the Position of NTC Deputy Commissioner up to that
point when she occupied the position of NTC, NCR Director concurrently as
NTC Deputy Commissioner, respondent have been receiving cash/money
allowances from one William Tieng in consideration of favours being asked
by William Cheng, which are, the issuance of Broadcasting Licenses from
the NTC with the intervention, complicity and intercession of respondent in
the grants and issuances of the desired NTC permits and / or licenses by
William Tieng, who, conspicuously and prominently, is the Chairman of
SOLAR ENTERTAINMENT, a well-known Private Media Broadcast entity.
The variable substantial amounts representing said allowances ranging
from Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (P200, 000.00) to Three Hundred
Thousand Pesos (P300, 000.00) written and recorded in yellow pad
papers are hereto attached as Annexes “A”, “A-1” “A-___” “A-___” and
“A-____” and are made indispensable parts of this Complaint-Affidavit;
3
3.4. Strong and trusty source bear out that said allowances in
variable amounts for checks preparation were prepared by Wilson Tieng’s
Chief Finance Officer, copy of which were given to one Attorney Ramos,
respondent’s alleged ‘bagwoman’ who received said amounts for and in
behalf of respondent albeit the variable amounts were meant for and
intended for respondent who ultimately received the same;
4.2. That William Tieng has interest in VTV, also a Private Media
Broadcast entity owned by one Bobong Velez. William Tieng operates said
VTV under Telered Technologies Services Corporation situated in Antipolo
City on his own with the consent and acquiescence of respondent, without
procuring the requisite NTC Permit and/or License in patent and brazen
violation of NTC regulations and pertinent Radio Laws;
xxx
(e) Causing any undue injury to any party, including the Government, or
giving any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference
in the discharge of his official administrative or judicial functions through
manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence. This
provision shall apply to officers and employees of offices or government
corporations charged with the grant of licenses or permits or other
concessions.
xxx
8.2. That as may be culled from the preceding narrations, the said
actuations of respondent constitute Direct Bribery since she committed acts
constitutive of a crime or not and whether or not the acts in consideration of
which the bribe was given was accomplished or not, penalized under
Art. 210 of the Revised Penal Code which pertinently provides in part, viz:
– Bribery Art. 210. Direct bribery. – Any public officer who shall agree to
perform an act constituting a crime, in connection with the performance
of his official duties, in consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present
received by such officer, personally or through the mediation of another, x x
x. If the gift was accepted by the officer in consideration of the execution
of an act which does not constitute a crime, and the officer executed
said act, x x x. and if said act shall not have been accomplished, x x x.;
.3. In relation to this, Section 2 of the same Charter provides that the
GeneralManager of the PCSO is a mere appointee of the Board, thus
5
contents of the above-mentioned documents, when she admitted under
oath before theBlue Ribbon Committee and on national television,
that:12.1 She indeed submitted a Memorandum-request
to President Arroyoon 4 January 2010 for the realignment of the budget for
media or advertisingexpenses from its operations budget to “intelligence”
fund;12.2 She personally submitted at least two Memoranda-
requests to thenPresident Arroyo and discussed the contents with
her.12.3 President Arroyo approved her request for realignment
of fundsfrom the operating expense to the “intelligence” fund, as she
personallywitnessed the signing thereof by President
Arroyo.12.4 She is the project proponent
of the said intelligence fund.12.5 She has custody of the said funds and
was a signatory of thechecks for the release of the same funds, and was
the payee of the said funds.This admission is also proved by the checks
themselves, which shows thatUriarte was both the payee and
signatory/payor of the said check. (Samples ofsuch checks are attached
as ANNEXES “K” and “L”).13. Ms. Uriarte encashed said checks and
disbursed the same.14. The realignment of the P150 Million public relation
or media fund wasintended for appropriating it for intelligence work.
Diverting funds from the operationalexpense, which is subject to regular
auditing, to intelligence fund which is not subject toregular auditing,
clearly exposes the intention of both Arroyo and Uriarte to disbursesaid
funds without the benefit of regular auditing scrutiny, in violation of our
laws.
President Arroyo and Uriarte conspired in using the intelligence fund
for use other than intelligence
work. _____________________________________
15. During the Senate investigation on 7 July 2011, Uriarte also admittedu
nder oath before the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee and on national
television thatbefore President Arroyo approved the realignment of funds,
the latter was already verymuch aware that the “intelligence fund” will not
be used for intelligence work but for: (a)work to “roll out” the Small Town
Lottery (“STL”) all over the country, (b) “reliefoperations” during calamities,
and (c) payment for “blood money” to save OFWsimprisoned abroad. This
is so because according to Uriarte, she personally discussedthe same with
President Arroyo during the times that she asked for the approval of
herletter-requests.16. However, despite such knowledge, President Arroyo
still approved therealignment of
funds.17. The illegal motivation of President Arroyo is clear. Despite know
ledge thatsaid intelligence fund will not be used for intelligence work, she
kept on approving the
6
9
various requests of Ms. Uriarte for the grant and realignment of funds to
this phantomintelligence fund project for
years.18. In view of the foregoing, it is very clear that President
Arroyo and Uriarteconspired in using the intelligence fund for purposes
other than intelligence work. This isso because Uriarte could not have
committed the illegal use of such intelligence fundhad President Arroyo not
approved the realignment of funds despite the latter’sknowledge that the
same will not be used for intelligence work. In this regard,
GLORIAMACAPAGAL-ARROYO
and
ROSARIO URIARTE
should be charged and should beheld liable for violating Article 220 of the
RPC.
PRESIDENT ARROYO AND URIARTE MAY ALSO BE HELD
LIABLEFOR VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 217 (4) OF THE REVISED PENAL
CODE
19. Article 217 (4) of the Revised Penal Code provides that:
“Art. 217. Malversation of public funds or property.— Presumption of
malversation.—Any public officer who, by reason of the duties of his office,
is accountable for public funds or property, shall appropriate the same, or
shall take or misappropriate or shall consent, or through abandonment or
negligence, shall permit any other person to take such public funds or
property, wholly or partially, or shall otherwise be guilty of the
misappropriation or malversation of such funds or property,
shall suffer: …The failure of a public officer to have duly forthcoming any
public funds which he is chargeable, upon demand by any duly
authorized officer, shall be prima facie evidence that he has put such
missing funds or property to personal use.
19.1 Under paragraph 4 of the same Article, if the
amount involvedexceeds P22,000.00, the penalty shall be reclusion
temporal in its maximumperiod to reclusion perpetua (as amended by RA
1060.)20. The questioned funds were malversed and appropriated by both
PresidentArroyo and Ms. Uriarte for themselves as provided under Art.
217. They have failed topresent any accounting of the said funds as
Uriarte merely claimed that her “one andonly copy” of her report
was with President Arryo. The P150 Million fund, disbursed afew months
before the 2010 elections will most likely have been used in the
elections.This is malversation and appropriation for gain and benefit of
President Arroyo. As toUriarte, the fact that she cleaned out almost all the
intelligence funds for the year in thefirst 6 months of 2010, and even
withdrew P2.5 million and P10 million on June 18,2010 only 12 days before
her term ends on June 30 (as shown in the Senate hearing)only shows the
intent to malverse said funds for their benefit.
8
24.1 According to Section 1 (d) of RA 7080, ill-gotten wealth means:
10
“Section 1. Definition of Terms. – As used in this Act, the term – …d) Ill-
gotten wealth means any asset, property, business enterprise or material
possession of any person within the purview of Section Two (2) hereof, acquired
by him directly or indirectly through dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates
and / or business associates by any combination or series of the following means
or similar
schemes: 1. Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or malversation of
public funds or raids on the public
treasury; 2. By the illegal or fraudulent xxx disposition of assets belonging to the
National government or any of its agencies or xxx government-owned or
controlled corporations;
and 3. By taking undue advantage of official position, authority xxx or influence
to unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the expense and to the damage and
prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the Philippines”.
25. The funds, amounting to more than 50 Million pesos, were malversed anda
ppropriated by President Arroyo and Ms. Uriarte for themselves and their
personalgain as provided under Art. 217 of the Revised Penal Code. Both
committed a series ofovert acts, as provided above through (i) conversion or
misuse, (ii) disposition of assetsand (iii) taking undue advantage of official
position. They should be charged, for theiracts, with the crime of plunder under
RA 7080 or the Plunder Law.
OTHER ANOMALIES IN THE PCSO SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED BY
THEOMBUDSMAN
26. PCSO throughout
the years has increased its budget and spending formedia and advertising
expenses during the time of Uriarte. That in 2007 it has incurredan Media or
PR expense in the staggering amounts of P686,900,486 Million; in
2008P529,449,558 Million; and in 2009 P1.5
Billion.27. This inordinate amount of budget allotted and spent for advertising, a
nitem under the Operating Fund of the PCSO budget, was subject of a
Commission onAudit (COA for brevity) review. The COA, in its Annual Audit
Reports AS EARLY AS2005, found recurring problem in the presence of
deficiencies in the advertisingexpenses of PSCO, where disbursement vouchers
differed with the amounts in thesupporting documents, as well as onerous and
unchecked and unmonitored advertisingcontracts and deals. The COA remarked
that:
“PCSO is not engaged in the marketing of consumer products that requires
extensive advertising to increase customer awareness and sales nor is there a
competition factor to contend with. While these advertisements intend to promote
patronage of sweepstakes tickets and lotto games, it is expected of management
to always count the costs in carrying out this objective. The number of
advertisements placed has to
9
be carefully planned, evaluated and limited to what is just enough
and necessary.Considering PCSO’s mandate to raise funds for health and
charity programs, instead of spending on advertising expenses, a portion
could have been used more meaningfully for charity. If advertising expenses
are reduced to even only about 50 percent of the current year amount, at
the minimum financial assistance of P10,000 each, at least an additional 35,850
indigents could have directly benefited. These beneficiaries will be the best
medium to promote the revenue generating activities of PCSO because the
public becomes aware that the funds generated are used to provide
11
10
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this 12
th
day of July 2011 at QuezonCity, Philippines. I hereby certify that I have personally
examined the affiants and I amsatisfied that they read and understood the
contents of their affidavit and that they havevoluntarily executed the same.
INVESTIGATING PROSECUTOR