KILOSBAYAN FOUNDATION and BANTAY KATARUNGAN ...

Supplemental Resolution
OMB-L-C-04-0922-J - Kilosbayan Foundation and Bantay Katarungan Foundation vs Benjamin Abalos, et al.,;
OMB-L-C-04-0983-J - Sen. Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr., FIO vs Benjamin Santos Abalos, et al.,;
OMB-C-C-04-0011-A - Sen. Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr. vs. Luzviminda Tancangco, et al.,;
OMB-L-A-04-0706-J - Sen. Aquilino Pimentel, Jr., FIO vs Eduardo Dulay Mejos,
Page 15 of 43
a) Should respondents BAC members be held criminally liable under
Sections 3(e) and (g) of RA 3019, for having declared MPC
eligible and for allowing it to participate in the bid. Corollary
thereto, will the same acts give rise to administrative liability for
Grave Misconduct, Dishonesty and Conduct Prejudicial to the Best
Interest of the Service?
b) Should respondents COMELEC Commissioners be held liable for
violation under Section 3(e) of RA 3019, when it passed
Resolution No. 6074 awarding Phase II contract to MPC, an entity
which allegedly did not take part in the bidding and for executing
the contract with MPeI an entity which the Supreme Court found
to be ineligible?
c) Is the Phase II Contract between COMELEC and MPeI grossly
disadvantageous to the government for which reason public and
private respondents may be held accountable under Section 3(g) of
RA 3019?
d) Finally, should private respondents be held liable for violating
Sections 3(e) and (g) of RA 3019 being the beneficiaries of the
nullified Resolution and Contract for Phase II?
Criminal liability of respondents
BAC under Sections 3 (e) & (g) of
Republic Act 3019
To be liable under Section 3(e) of RA 3019 the following elements
must concur:
15