Ex-PRA chief Alberto Agra acquitted of graft

MANILA, Philippines – The anti-graft court Sandiganbayan has acquitted former Philippine Reclamation Authority chairperson Alberto Agra of graft stemming from alleged preference for a group in a reclamation project.

In its decision dated June 5, the Sandiganbayan Third Division granted Agra’s demurrer to evidence, saying that the prosecution did not present enough evidence to support its allegation that Agra acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence in the execution of memorandums of agreement between the PRA and the City of Bacoor, Cavite, and the project partners for the reclamation of a portion of Bacoor Bay.

“The court finds the evidence insufficient to establish that Agra represented, directed, and instructed the execution of the subject MOAs,”  the court said.

“The allegation that Agra ‘represented’ PRA in entering into and executing MOAs was not established. A plain reading of the MOAs shows that PRA was represented therein by its General Manager/CEO, not by Agra,” it added.

Prosecutors had accused Agra of giving preference or advantage to the Bacoor group against the interests of the province of Cavite and Cavitex Holdings, Incorporated (CHI) which claimed right of first refusal over the same reclamation area under a 1994 Joint Venture Agreement (JVA).

The court said that then-PRA general manager and CEO Janilo Rubiato had represented PRA in the agreement, which was acknowledged by prosecution witnesses, among them former Cavite governor Jonvic Remulla.

The court also said that the prosecution itself admitted on record that the February 17, 2021 MOA “does not overlap with, and is unrelated to, the project contemplated in Cavite-CHI’s 1994 JVA.”

It also said that the whole PRA board, and not just the PRA chair, governs the agency.

“Moreover, the PRA Manual does not provide that the Chairperson has the authority to veto or overrule a Board Resolution. Based on the foregoing, the prosecution failed to prove that Agra represented PRA or directed and instructed the entry into and execution of the MOAs,” the Sandiganbayan said. 

In his demurrer to evidence, Agra questioned the validity of the right of first refusal invoked by CHI and Cavite province. He argued that it was not legally binding since their reclamation plan was still subject to public bidding.

Agra also said that even if, for the sake of argument, the right of first refusal was valid, there was no evidence to show an overlap between the Bacoor Project and the proposed Cavite-CHI project.– Rappler.com