THE Office of the Ombudsman announced on Friday the conviction of three ex-Government Service Insurance System employees for graft in connection with the irregular release of loans.
The Ombudsman said the Pasay City Regional Trial Court’s Branch 114 Judge Edwin Ramizo has convicted then computer operator IV Clemente Flojo, data controller IV Reuben Cellona and computer terminal operator IV Emmanuel Valera, and sentenced them to a jail term of six years.
The lower court also ordered the perpetual disqualification of Flojo, Cellona and Valera from holding public office.
Ramizo said the three accused were found to have demanded and received P55,000 in 2004 in exchange for the approval of the enhanced salary loan applications of 22 employees from the Philippine Postal Office.
Several witnesses surfaced and testified of the loan applications from July to November 2004 which were previously rejected by the GSIS.
But the three accused “conspired in padding the payroll of the PPC employees in order to be qualified to avail of the enhanced salary loans,” the decision read.
In addition, GSIS officials testified that Flojo and company padded the salaries encoded in the membership administration base and that subsequent to the granting of such loans, the salaries were reduced back to their original and correct level.
The loan applications were all granted and released in one day contrary to the regular three to four days processing period, according to the Ombudsman, citing the lower court’s decision.
The court found that the applicants gave facilitation money to the accused ranging from P500 to P2,500 in exchange for loans ranging from P89,336 to P154,008.
“By virtue of this padding-reduction process, the concerned PPC employees successfully secured and obtained loans in amounts higher than what they were legally entitled to,” the decision stated.
“In the course of the administrative investigation, it was found that the payroll padding would not have occurred without the direct participation of GSIS personnel who had access to and knowledge of the Membership Service Profile, which contains the name, birth, position and salary of GSIS members. The prosecution aptly proved that accused requested and in fact received consideration not only in cash but also in kind in exchange for facilitating the loan applications by “doing something” on the rejected applications which was effected by altering and/or padding the salaries of the loan applicants.”