MANILA — The Sandiganbayan has dismissed the graft case against Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority Chairman and former Olongapo City mayor Rolen Paulino in connection to a 2014 deal for the lease of the Olongapo Civic Center Complex.

In a resolution promulgated on Oct. 24, 2022, the anti-graft court's Fifth Division faulted the prosecution for the delayed filing of the case after Paulino alleged that his right to speedy disposition of cases was violated.

“Certainly, the length of delay or more than four years in completing the present information and the failure of the prosecution to present justifiable reasons of such delay, this court rules that all of herein accused’s right to speedy disposition of cases had been violated,” the court said.

The dismissal order included Paulino’s co-accused, namely Aquilino Cortez Jr., Elena Dabu, Benjamin Cajudo II, Eduardo Guerrero, Noel Atienza, Alrueula Bundang-Ortiz, Edna Elane, Emerito Linus Bacay, Randy Sionzon, Egmidio Gonzales Jr., Tony Balde III, Cristiflor Buduhan, Anna Marin Sison, Mamerto Balabute and Joy Cahilig.

The case stemmed from the agreement between the city government and SM Prime Holdings Incorporated for the lease and development of the Olongapo Civic Center Complex.

• Olongapo mayor, local execs defy suspension order

The court also noted in its resolution that the prosecution had cured a defect in the original case which landed before the Sandiganbayan Seventh Division and was eventually dismissed.

The present information before the Fifth Division categorically noted that the lease agreement was governed by the Build Operate Transfer or BOT law, the court noted.

But Paulino stressed that in the new information, the facts do not support the allegation that the lease agreement was covered by the BOT law.

The court’s resolution however focused on the delayed filing of the case, as it was noted that the affidavit complaint was filed before the Ombudsman in 2015 and the original information was only filed before the Sandiganbayan in 2019.

The court stated that applying Administrative Order No. 1 Series of 2020, it appeared that the Ombudsman took more than 4 years to file the case, going beyond the 12 months and 24 months provided for in the same order.

The prosecution had asserted that the delay was due to the re-evaluation of documents and the complexity of the issues at hand, which was also complicated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

“However, the said circumstance is not one of those enumerated as a consideration to justify extensions, under Administrative Order 1 series of 2020, issued by no less than the Office of the Ombudsman,” the court said.

Associate Justice Maria Theresa Mendoza-Arcega penned the resolution, with the concurrence of Division Chairperson Rafael Lagos and Associate Justice Maryann Corpus-Mañalac.

• 'Euro general' caught with 105,000 euros in cash fined P200,000 for violating BSP circular
• Former lawmaker acquitted of graft, malversation charges
• Ex-Navy officer convicted, ordered to pay P17-M fine for medical procurements