The Sandiganbayan has denied the motions of Tarlac Rep. Noel Rivera seeking the dismissal of two of his graft cases filed in connection with his alleged stake in a construction firm that secured government contracts.
The anti-graft court’s Sixth Division said the information filed against Rivera was sufficient.
Rivera filed motions to quash the two cases for alleged violation of Section 3(h) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (Republic Act 3019), which stem from his alleged ownership of a construction firm that won contracts for infrastructure projects from the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).
One of the contracts was for the P94.86 million construction and improvement of an access road in San Narciso, Zambales, which was awarded to Tarlac 3-G Construction and Development Corp. in May 2023.
The other was the P14.35 million contract for the reconstruction or upgrading of damaged paved roads awarded to Tarlac 3-G Construction and Development Corp. in January 2024.
The prosecution said that this was a conflict of interest and violated the prohibition against members of Congress from having interest in government contracts.
But Rivera contended that the information was defective because there was no criminal offense shown through the narration of facts.
He cited the 2023 Supreme Court ruling in People v. Floirendo, where the court clarified that mere ownership of shares in a corporation that transacts with the government, by itself, does not establish a violation of Article VI, Section 14 of the 1987 Constitution.
He said it must be shown that he had an active participation or actual intervention.
But the Sandiganbayan said that in determining whether the information is sufficient, it only needs to see if the facts alleged, if hypothetically admitted, would establish the essential elements of the crime.
“Without doubt, the Information alleges facts constituting the elements of Violation of Sec. 3(h) of Republic Act No. 3019. The other matters raised by accused Rivera are matters of defense, which are better threshed out during the trial on the merits,” it said.