Sandigan clears Purisima, others in Werfast case
The Sandiganbayan has acquitted former Philippine National Police chief Alan Purisima and several others of graft charges over the allegedly irregular 2011 courier service deal he approved with Werfast Documentary Agency, Inc.
In an 83‑page decision dated Dec. 5 but released on Sunday, the antigraft court’s Sixth Division cleared Purisima and the following former PNP officials after the prosecution failed to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt:
Former Firearms and Explosives Office (FEO) and Central Luzon police director Raul Petrasanta, former Central Security Group chief Gil Meneses, former FEO chief Supt. Napoleon Estilles, former FEO Senior Supt. Allan Parreño, former FEO Senior Supt. Eduardo Acierto, former FEO Senior Supt. Melchor Reyes, former FEO Supt. Lenbell Fabia, former FEO Chief Inspector Sonia Calixto, former FEO Chief Inspector Nelson Bautista, former FEO Chief Inspector Ricardo Zapata Jr. and former Senior Inspector Ford Tuazon.
The five Werfast incorporators also acquitted were Mario Juan, Salud Bautista, Enrique Valerio, Lorna Perena and Juliana Pasia.
The Sandiganbayan also ordered the release of the cash bonds posted by the accused for their provisional liberty, subject to the usual accounting and auditing rules.
HDO lifted
Hold departure orders (HDO) previously issued against them were likewise lifted, with the court directing the Bureau of Immigration to remove their names from the hold departure list in connection with the case.
According to the antigraft court, the accused police officers did not act with manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence when accrediting Werfast as the PNP’s courier service.
“Although the evidence presented by the accused police officers would reveal that indeed the documentary requirements submitted by WerFast for accreditation as courier service provider were lacking, the same cannot support a finding that they are guilty of having acted with evident bad faith,” the document reads.
The court also found no evidence of a conspiracy between the officials and the private individuals involved.
“Considering that the accused police officers were declared innocent of any wrongdoing, it stands to reason that the accused private individuals in this case had no one to conspire with,” the decision read.
Furthermore, the Sandiganbayan noted that the May 2011 memorandum of agreement (MOA) was never implemented and, therefore, could not serve as the basis for a Section 3(e) violation under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
The court also stated that the prosecution failed to prove that any unwarranted benefit was conferred upon Werfast or that any undue injury was caused to the PNP.
No certainty
“The prosecution failed to prove with actual certainty the supposed loss or damage and to provide sufficient and reasonable basis, which this Court can measure,” the decision added.
The case stemmed from allegations that Purisima entered into a memorandum of agreement with Werfast and accredited the firm as the PNP’s courier service provider for all firearms license applications despite its failure to comply with government regulations.
The prosecution had claimed Werfast lacked registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission, authorization from the Department of Transportation and accreditation from the Department of Science and Technology.
Findings of the Ombudsman at the time revealed that Purisima entered into a courier service contract with Werfast even though the latter had no corporate existence or juridical personality when the PNP entered into the MOA in May 2011.
The Ombudsman found that no public bidding was conducted, and that the MOA was entered into despite Werfast’s lack of a track record as a courier service company.
The graft charges against Purisima and 16 others were formally filed before the Sandiganbayan in May 2016.
