Bacolod City – Lone District Representative Alfredo Abelardo Benitez has dismissed the complaint filed before the Office of the Ombudsman against him, almost all members of the Sangguniang Panlungsod, and other individuals, as “baseless and politically motivated.”
The complaint filed by the late broadcaster, Rolando Baliguat, concerns the Build-Transfer-Maintain (BTM) Agreement between the City Government of Bacolod and Highdata Infra Corp. for the Bacolod “Super City” Project.
From day one, this project was undertaken in full compliance with the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Code of the Philippines (R.A. 11966), the Bacolod P4 Ordinance, and all other applicable laws, Benitez pointed out in a statement.
It underwent almost two years of rigorous evaluation, Swiss Challenge proceedings, multi-agency review, and legal vetting by both the City Legal Office and the PPP Center. Every stage—from the unsolicited proposal to the final ratification by the Sangguniang Panlungsod—was thoroughly documented, transparent, and subjected to proper institutional oversight, the Bacolod solon said.
Then Bacolod City Mayor Benitez, Councilors Al Victor Espino, Israel Salanga, Celia Matea Flor, Psyche Marie Sy Lady Glez Gonzales-Pallen, Jason Isidro Villarosa, Em Ang; then Councilors Cindy Rojas, Vladimir Gonzales, and Simplicia Distrito; and current Vice Mayor Claudio Jesus Raymundo Puentevella, along with five officials of Highdata Infra Corp. were charged by Baliguat before the Ombudsman for alleged violation of RA 3019, known as Anti-Graft Corrupt Practices Act.
Finding enough basis to proceed with the criminal investigation of the aforementioned case/s, the Ombudsman ordered the respondents to file their respective counter affidavits and other controverting evidence on the complaint filed by Baliguat.
Benitez said the allegation that the contract is “grossly disadvantageous” to the government is unfounded.
A comprehensive Value-for-Money analysis confirmed that the project delivers substantial public benefit: modernization of city infrastructure through a Centralized Command Center, intelligent street lighting with surveillance analytics, and enhanced tax mapping and GIS systems—all without any unlawful disbursement of public funds, he added.
Questions raised about the proponent’s capability, the timing of the contract, and supposed procedural lapses disregard both fact and law, the solon said.
He also pointed out that the PPP Code expressly allows partnerships with newly registered corporations that pass capability evaluations.
The election period ban cited by the complainant, according to Benitez, applies only to actual disbursements, which never occurred.
Furthermore, the Sangguniang Panlungsod’s decision to fast-track approval of City Ordinance No. 1089 was a valid legislative prerogative under the Local Government Code. No public rights were compromised. No public asset was surrendered, he added.
The Centralized Command Center—contrary to misleading assertions—remains fully owned and controlled by the City and serves multiple public purposes beyond the PPP project, Benitez further said.
He described the complaint as built on speculation, legal misinterpretation, and political malice.
Jurisprudence is clear: public officials are presumed to have acted regularly and in good faith, absent clear proof of bad faith, malice, or gross negligence. None of those are present here, Benitez further said.
Stressing that the issued Ombudsman order is just a procedural matter, Benitez said they are confident that the case they say is baseless, will immediately be dismissed for lack of probable cause and merit. (Gilbert Bayoran via tvds)