Ex-Panglao mayor faces jail time for graft
GUILTY. Former Panglao, Bohol mayor Doloreich Dumaluan failed to convince the Sandiganbayan to reverse an October 2016 ruling.
MANILA, Philippines – A former mayor of Panglao, Bohol is facing up to 10 years in prison after anti-graft court Sandiganbayan rejected his appeal to reverse the guilty verdict in his graft case.
Doloreich Dumaluan was found guilty of graft last October over his refusal to issue a permit for the application of the Bohol Beach Club (BBC) for a locational certification filed in May 2005.
Dumaluan is also the deputy secretary general for the Visayas of the Partido Demokratiko Pilipino-Lakas ng Bayan (PDP-Laban), the ruling party.
The court's Special 3rd Division, in its October 2016 ruling, said Dumaluan did not issue a permit within reasonable time even if the BBC followed all requirements.
During the trial, Dumaluan admitted he had a pending ownership dispute over an area covered by the BBC's expansion plants. He filed the dispute in June 2005, a month after the BBC filed its application for locational certification.
The Sandiganbayan said Dumaluan's failure to act on the locational clearance was "for the purpose of directly obtaining benefit for himself by protecting his claimed interest in the subject property."
According to Republic Act (RA) 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, it is unlawful for government officials to "neglect or refuse" within a considerable timeframe and without "sufficient justification" matters pending before him or her because he or she stands to benefit directly or indirectly from the lack of action.
The court said the BBC presented a valid property title for the disputed beach area.
Presiding Justice and 3rd Division chairperson Amparo Cabotaje-Tang wrote the resolution with associate justices Alexander Gesmundo and Maria Theresa Dolores Gomez-Estoesta concurring with her opinion.
Both associate justices Samuel Martires and Michael Frederick Musngi dissented. Martires has since been appointed to the Supreme Court, the President's first appointee there.
Martires said in his dissenting opinion that Dumaluan deserves to be acquitted because as mayor, he did not have the authority to issue a locational clearance. The newly-appointed Supreme Court justice also said the dispute was justification for Dumaluan's refusal to issue a clearance.
In his petition, Dumaluan said the dissent of the two justices made for reasonable grounds for his acquittal.
The court shot down that argument, pointing out that "a dissenting opinion is without binding effect, being a mere expression of the individual view of a member of the Court or other collegial body while disagreeing with the conclusion held by the majority." – Rappler.com
