THE Sandiganbayan has found no irregularity in the bulk purchase of fuel by the provincial government of Camarines Sur in 2010 when incumbent Rep. LRay Villafuerte was still governor of the province.

In its 55-page decision penned by Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Karl Miranda, the anti-graft court’s 6th division cleared Villafuerte of the charges filed against him after the prosecution “failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt” that he, as the then-governor, had conspired with the provincial government’s long-time fuel supplier to commit graft when he approved the bulk procurement of P20 million-worth of petroleum products without public bidding.

The Court noted that the provincial government had actually incurred savings for the province in purchasing petroleum products from its long-time supplier, given the locked-in prices at the time of procurement, which meant that the Provincial Capitol was protected from subsequent surges in the pump prices of fuel.

Villafuerte had approved the procurement to offset the volatility in fuel prices in 2010.

The transaction was not disadvantageous to the provincial government because as mentioned above, it did not lose, but even saved money from the fuel deposit arrangement because as the exclusive wholesaler of Petron in the province, Petron Naga offered the lowest possible fuel prices compared to those of other Petron gas stations.

On top of anticipating a possible jump in fuel prices to save public funds, the Provincial Capitol also made an arrangement with the supplier on the latter’s free storage of all the gasoline and diesel products that were purchased by the local government.

“If there is one lesson to be learned from the present pandemic gravely affecting the nation, it is that government must be able to adapt to change and act with dispatch in addressing emergencies before these could turn into crises. In doing so public officials will need all the guidance they can get from concerned government agencies to make sure their exercise of such power, including that of procurement, will be in accordance with law,” the Sandiganbayan said.

“Our anti-corruption and procurement laws should not deter government officials from exercising lawful powers to address emergencies and crises. Rather, they should guide and motivate them to do the right thing. Hence, the importance of clear and updated policies and rules from relevant government agencies on the matter,” it added.

The charges against Villafuerte before the Sandiganbayan involved the purchase by the provincial government of petroleum products from its longtime supplier and the province’s biggest dealer of fuel—Petron Naga Fuel Express—without public bidding, which is a legal arrangement practiced by the province and many other local government units (LGUs) and national government agencies, including the Office of the Ombudsman, based on research and information obtained from the Philippine Government Electronic Procurement System (PHILGEPS) website.

In its ruling, the Sandiganbayan pointed out that the provincial government’s decision to buy fuel from Petron Naga through negotiated procurement was allowed by law and that the prosecution’s claim that Villafuerte acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexecusable negligence in proceeding with the purchase without public bidding “to be without merit.”

The Commission on Audit (CoA) did not previously issue any Notice of Disallowance (NDs) or suspension in the direct purchase–or without public bidding–by the provincial government from Petron Naga, which was a long-standing practice of previous provincial administrations before Villafuerte took over as governor in 2004.

The Court said that Villafuerte had even “exercised some degree of circumspection before he approved and signed the disbursement vouchers” because he had first sought advice from Atty.. Janice Ian Regaspi Cleofe, the provincial legal officer, on whether he should continue the local government’s practice of purchasing fuel from Petron without public bidding.

Cleofe had pointed out to Villafuerte that there was nothing wrong about it because the enactment of the Local Government Code did not expressly repeal or supersede the earlier COA issuances requiring LGUs to source their fuel needs from Petron.

Villafuerte, in his defense, noted that the rule that government procurement must undergo public bidding is not ironclad, as Republic Act (RA) 9184 (or the Government Procurement Reform Act) provided for exceptions—particularly direct contracting or single source procurement—to ensure economy and efficiency, on the condition that the government must obtain the most advantageous price in purchasing products or services.

The Court also ruled that there was no conspiracy involved between Villafuerte and Petron Naga as the prosecution failed to establish this allegation.

Other than affixing his signature and giving his approval to the disbursement vouchers and checks, there was no evidence that Villafuerte participated in the fuel procurements, the Sandiganbayan said.

Documents show that Villafuerte had no hand in choosing Petron Naga as fuel supplier for the CamSur provincial government. His only role was to approve or sign purchase requests and other disbursement papers and to continue the system already in place long before he was governor of the province.

The anti-graft court noted that in the Supreme Court (SC) ruling in the case of Arias v. Sandiganbayan, the high court said that “All heads of offices have to rely to a reasonable extent on their subordinates and the good faith of those who prepare bids, purchase supplies or enter into negotiation.”

There was also no evidence that the Camarines Sur lawmaker and the fuel supplier directly dealt with each other to suggest conspiracy, the Sandiganbayan added.

The Court agreed with Villafuerte that adopting competitive bidding for the province’s fuel would have been impractical back then because the players in the oil industry quote the same prices for their products anyway—even up to now—and prices of such products were volatile in 2010.

Earlier, in a separate complaint for malversation of public funds filed against Villafuerte involving the same issue, the Office of Ombudsman similarly dismissed the charges because there was neither evidence of misappropriation nor a finding that the procurement was grossly and manifestly disadvantageous to the government.

In a separate case, Villafuerte was also cleared by the Sandiganbayan on the P6.3 million security service contracts he entered into in behalf of the province when he was governor in 2008 and 2009.

In a 4-1 vote of the Sandiganbayan justices, the anti-graft court granted Villafuertes’ demurer to evidence on his motion that the evidence of the prosecution was weak after its presentation during trial.