The solon has been
convicted by the Sandigan Bayan on September 2, 2003 with two counts
of nepotism charges filed against him by Sofia L. Patrimonio, and was
penalized to pay a fine of 1,000 pesos for each conviction with a
subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.
The granting of the
executive clemency by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to Cong. Uy
however, was in time when the Congress is set to vote on the substance
of the impeachment complaint against the president filed by the Black
and White movement.
In an interview aired
over a radio station in
Calbayog
City,
Cong. Uy quickly dismissed public speculations that he bargained his
vote against the impeachment because of the pardon he got from the
president.
But it can be recalled
that the solon from Samar’s first district voted in favor of the
impeachment of PGMA last year, during the time when Cong. Catalino
Figueroa of Samar’s 2nd district was negotiating for his
anti-impeachment vote to get MGen. Jovito Palparan’s head rolling from
Samar; Cong. Uy however did not attend the plenary in congress when
the final resolution of the impeachment trial has been undertaken.
“But I am casting my
vote against the impeachment now because it is only meant to harass
the president, and we should help this government move on, and this
will not happen if the president is always tailed by aggravation of
her political foes”, Cong. Uy disclosed.
He also added that the
situation being faced by President Arroyo at present is almost the
same as what had happened to him, accordingly, his conviction to the
nepotism charges was a product of blatant manipulations by his
political nemesis, stressing that it was done mainly to prevent him
from serving his constituents and for some people in Samar’s first
district to monopolize power.
Strong Opposition
Upon knowing that the
Board of Pardons and Parole, thru its chief parole officer Ernesto P.
Dizon, that Cong. Reynaldo Uy’s petition for an executive clemency
will be treated on July 2006, Sofia L. Patrimonio, the private
complainant filed her petition for strong opposition to the solon’s
request for a presidential pardon.
In her petition,
Patrimonio claimed that the convicted felon if allowed to be pardoned
would undoubtedly have a very mocking respect for the country’s laws
and the judicial system.
Patrimonio likewise
cited that the presidential pardon will quash the misdeeds of the
convicted solon, “and would only prove to the public that crime after
all can be paid by a stroke of a presidential pen”, she said in her
petition.
And further stipulated
to the Board of Pardons and Parole that Cong. Uy does not deserved to
be granted with presidential pardon by the very president that he
accuses of having committed fraud and for alleged electioneering in
last year’s impeachment complaint filed in congress.
History of the Case
Based on the Fourth
Division of the Sandigan Bayan obtained by the writer, Cong. Uy was
convicted with two of Nepotism charges filed by one Sofia L.
Patrimonio, on September 2, 2003, the material evidences presented was
based on his stint then as the Mayor of Calbayog City.
The charges which were
docketed as criminal case numbers 25641 and 25642, were tried during
the colon’s mayoralty stint, to which on April 16, 1993 by his
capacity as an appointing officer, appointed Mr. Frederick B. Uy, his
nephew, as Agricultural Technician I at the Calbayog City Agriculture
Office who indicated on his personal data sheet that he is not in any
way connected to the appointing officer up to the third degree of
consanguinity or affinity as required by law, but later Frederick got
a promotional appointment in July of the same year as the General
Maintenance Foreman for the said city but on his data sheet this time,
he indicated that he is already connected with the appointing officer;
that Antonina Uy was also hired as Office Helper on September 1993,
but the solon pleaded not guilty to the two charges during the
arraignment.
Both of the subject
employees are children of Pedro Uy, the brother of Congressman
Reynaldo Uy.
It was only in April
of 2000 that the evidences were formally offered to the prosecution,
to include the personal data sheet, appointment papers, live birth
certificates, plantilla of casual employees and affidavits, and
eventually the court admitted the exhibits after almost two years,
that was in February 18, 2002 and the trial went on.
Along the trial
process, the court found the evidences against the solon relatively
strong and were made even stronger by the testimonies of three
witnesses, Sofia Patrimonio, the private complainant, Manuel Barral, a
former Sangguniang Panglungsod member, and Vicente Catorce, the city’s
HRMO IV; thus, based on the evidences, the fourth division of the
Sandigan Bayan as presided by Justice Minita V. Chico-Nazario ruled
out that Cong. Reynaldo Uy is guilty of the nepotism charges.
The Rebuttal Evidences of the Court
According to the
decision, the verbal admission of Cong. Reynaldo Uy during the court
proceeding that Frederick and Antonina Uy are his nephew and niece
respectively are cited as judicial admission, to which in accordance
with the new civil code, the two subject employees are relatives
within the third civil degree of consanguinity, thus, “their
appointment to government service by the appointing officer, which is
their uncle, was a clear violation of the Nepotism Law”, the decision
explained.
The Sandigan Bayan
likewise ruled out that the defense of Cong. Uy stressing his
exemption from the nepotism law for being a medical practitioner as
prescribed by the Administrative Code of 1987 is invalid; the court
decision informed that the said exemption refers mainly to the
appointees and not to the appointing entity.
The court likewise
disagree on the defense claim, that Antonina Uy’s appointment was
exempted from the rule of nepotism because she is a registered nurse
and that she was assigned at the City Health Office.
But the court decision
stipulated that “those exempted from the operation of the rules on
nepotism are: persons employed in a confidential capacity; teachers;
physicians; and members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines”,
further stressing that the position of a nurse was not included in the
enumeration.
Likewise, the court
justified the verdict against the solon, saying that the convict
cannot rely on the claim that he signed the appointment papers of the
two employees based on the HRMOs certification indicating that all
requirements had been complied with, citing that “ignorance of the law
excuses no one from compliance therewith”.
And things went worst
for Cong. Uy, when a letter purportedly sent by the solon to the
complainant offering moral or financial help was presented as
evidence, to which the court described the actuation as an offer of
compromise.
“In criminal cases, an
offer of compromise by the accused is an implied admission of guilt”,
the decision said.
