TWO days ago, I have made my last and final report to our people, my beloved Pangasinenses. I have stated during my SOPA, “Magaan ang aking kalooban dahil iiwanan ko sa susunod na Gobernador ang isang lalawigan ng Pangasinan na mas maganda, mas maayos, mas maunlad, mas marangal at ngayon ay tinitingala na sa buong bansa.”

Unfortunately, two days after my State of the Province Address (SOPA), we are surprised to read in national newspapers, the Philippine Star and Philippine Inquirer, articles written by Eva Visperas and by Yolanda Sotelo, respectively, stating that the Ombudsman affirms Pangasinan governor’s indictment. Now, it would seem that all of our accomplishments are being overshadowed by this unfortunate turn of events. 

We are puzzled how the two correspondents of national dailies were able to write their respective stories about the Ombudsman case when we, the very parties to the case, have not yet received any copy of the Resolution of the Ombudsman which was mentioned in the articles, up to now (February 12). Suffice it to say that it is well known in the media industry that the two lady correspondents are close media allies of a gubernatorial bet opposing the present administration.

With all due respect to the Honorable Ombudsman, we are in a quandary as to the basis of the indictment. The article in the Philippine Star states that “the Ombudsman said that the government lost Php10.7 Million for allowing the export of the extracted minerals to China.” What was the basis of the Ombudsman in making such a conclusion? The very complainants in the case, led by Mr. Vicente Oliquino, (in a Joint Motion/ Manifestation dated November 12, 2014) expressly denied having made any statement relative to the alleged export of the minerals to China. The complainants, under oath, stated that “We have never made any such statement in the pleadings which we have caused to be filed, and lest we be charged for perjury, we wish that said statement be rectified.” Further, the complainants wrote, “The truth of the matter is that the recovered magnetite was not transferred or transported anywhere outside the Philippines. The magnetite was stockpiled in the same barangay (Malimpuec, Lingayen, Pangasinan) where they were extracted, and never left the place.” 

Thus, there was no damage at all, or loss to the government because the black sand which was gathered never left the barangay where it was extracted. Anyone can see for himself that the stockpile of magnetite sand, up to this date, remains untouched in Brgy. Malimpuec, Lingayen, Pangasinan.

The article of Ms. Sotelo is quoted stating that, “The Ombudsman also said that the companies which were hired to remove the black sand did not acquire an environmental compliance certificate and were not members of the Philippine Contractor’s Accreditation Board.”

If Ms. Sotelo’s report is accurate, apparently, the fact that the ECC was subsequently issued for our eco-tourism project was not considered. On January 2, 2013, the EMB, DENR thru Dir. Juan Miguel T. Cuna issued ECC-CO-1210-0019 for the proposed Lingayen Golf Course Project. The said document was forwarded to the Office of the Ombudsman in a Manifestation dated January 4, 2013. Also, even assuming that the private respondents were not members of the Philippine Contractor’s Accreditation Board, such fact is of no moment because the agreement which was entered into did not involve any expenditure or disbursement of public funds.

May I reiterate that no less than the former President of the Republic, Fidel V. Ramos declared in the Presidential Proclamation 1258 that “the parcels of land of the public domain in Barangays Sabangan, Estanza, Malimpuec and Capandanan, Lingayen, Pangasinan were segregated, reserved and declared for eco-tourism and other sustainable development projects and activities for the Provincial Government of Pangasinan.” With this in mind, the Provincial Government of Pangasinan thought of ways to develop the eco-tourism zone, without incurring tremendous expense.

Part and parcel of the eco-tourism zone is the proposed Golf Course Project. With the terrain and cantaromas in the identified area, it is difficult or almost impossible to establish the required vegetative growth for a golf course. It was recommended by experts in the matter of building golf courses that the black sand be removed, and be replaced with topsoil, so that the area can be planted with the appropriate grass and other vegetative growth. 

And so, as confirmed by our DENR officials who conducted actual ocular inspections, there was no black sand mining in the area. The separation of the black sand is merely incidental to the purpose of clearing the area, in order to make it appropriate for the required vegetative growth. 

Assuming further that there was lack of the ECC at the start of the project, it is undisputed that our actions were done in good faith. This, together with the fact that there was no damage or loss suffered by our government and the people, how can an indictment for graft and corruption stand? This, we humbly ask.

Share your Comments or Reactions

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments