TIM eMagazine Vol.1 Issue 4
Ombudsman junks the motion for
reconsideration for the dismissal of
cases filed against marina officials
T
he Office of the Ombudsman denied the
Motion for Reconsideration filed by the Nelson
P. Ramirez, President of the United Filipino
Seafarers (UFS), as the Complainant-Movant,
to reconsider the dismissal of the criminal
and administrative complaints filed against
MARINA Officials.
In a Joint Order, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales
denied the Motion for Reconsideration asserting that the
present Motion does not present any newly discovered
evidence or meritorious material arguments to warrant a
reconsideration of the assailed Joint Resolution dated 04
June 2016.
She stressed that neither does it show that grave errors
of law or serious irregularities were committed by the
Ombudsman prejudicial to Complainant-Movant’s interest.
The dismissed complaints were filed by Nelson P. Ramirez
against public respondents, MARINA Administrator
Maximo Q Mejia Jr, DeputyAdministrator and Primary
Bids and Award Committee (PBAC) Chairperson, Atty.
Gloria J. Victoria-Bañas, BAC members: Atty. Bashirudin
U. Adil, Ma.Concepcion C. Arbolario, Arnie F. Santiago,
Sonia B. Malaluan, Atty. Maria Rowena B. Hubilla;BACTechnical Working Group members: Nenita Atienza, Fe
M. Calaoagan, Cristine D. San Luisand private respondent,
Jaime H. Aldaba, Executive Vice President and General
Manager, APOProduction Unit Inc. (APO) for violation of
Section 3 (e) and (g), Republic Act (RA) 3019, asamended
(The Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act), Republic Act
9184, (GovernmentProcurement Act) and Republic Act
9485 (Anti-Red Tape Act of 2007) for the criminal case;
andadministrative case for Dishonesty, Grave Abuse of
Authority, Conduct Prejudicial to the BestInterest of the
Service, and Gross Neglect of Duty for all aforementioned
MARINA Officials, with the exclusion of Jaime H. Aldaba
of APO.
The complaints alleged that the respondents committed
the said offenses when they awarded the contract for the
printing, supply and delivery of Seafarers Identification
Record Book (SIRB) to APO without any supporting BAC
Resolution. He further claimed that the Memorandum
of Agreement (MOA) between MARINA and APO
downgraded the features of the SIRB by removing the
symbology and security features, among others. In the
Joint Resolution, the Ombudsman enunciated that with
regard to the charge of violation of Section 3(e) of RA
3109, as amended, Complainant failed to establish that
the respondents acted with manifest partiality, evident
bad faith, or gross inexcusable