THE Office of the Ombudsman ordered on Thursday the filing of two counts of graft, one count of malversation and one count of malversation through falsification of public documents against a former Caloocan City representative Mari Mitzi Cajayon before the Sandiganbayan.
The charges stemmed from Cajayon’s alleged involvement in the Priority Development Assistance Fund scam.
Also facing charges were former Department of Social Welfare and Development Secretary Esperanza Cabral, Undersecretary Mateo Montaño, Assistant Secretary Vilma Cabrera, chief accountant Leonila Hayahay and assistant director Pacita Sarino as well as Cenon Mayor of Kalookan Assistance Council Inc.
In 2009, Cajayon personally endorsed the implementation of her PDAF-funded Comprehensive Integrated Delivery of Social Services program to KACI.
On April 13, 2009, the Department of Budget and Management released P10,000,000 to the DSWD as the lawmaker’s chosen implementing agency.
Field validation showed Cajayon’s projects were dubious and considered as ghost projects.
On Oct. 14, 2010, the Commission on Audit issued a notice of suspension over a portion of Cajayon’s PDAF, citing the absence of procurement documents to support the acquisition of tents, medicines, trophies and balls.
Beneficiaries also denied having received any financial or burial assistance from the congresswoman.
A background check with the Department of Trade and Industry and the Quezon City government revealed that Silver A “was not registered and has no record in said agencies.”
The CoA also found that the NGO-selection process was not compliant with COA Circular No. 2007-001 and Resolution No. 12-2007 of the Government Procurement Policy Board.
“Cajayon failed to show that she has exerted earnest effort to ensure that KACI liquidated the second tranches of the subject funds and her failure to do so could only mean that she benefitted from the transaction, or that she was grossly negligent in her contractual obligation, making her liable for the offenses charged.”
“Cajayon, is after all, accountable for the funds, because she has control, if not actual custody, of the funds, as these funds cannot be released without her prior consent and directives.”