Officials From Manila's Accounting and Property Division Involved In An Anomalous Transaction

A two-page notice of disallowance against some of the government officials in the city Manila was released by the Commission on Audit last October 29, 2009. The Commission on Audit filed the said notice when they found out that there were deficiencies on the voucher presented by the officials, which concerned the payments for the alleged contracted services of 21 consultants. Domingo C. Bocalan Jr., State Auditor IV, who did the auditing of the said vouchers claimed that the 21 names of the consultants included in the payroll submitted for auditing were unreal, and that the contracted services did not took place. This under-the-table transaction have cost the city P5,058,000.00.

The notice of disallowance was filed soon after Mayor Alfredo Lim said in his affidavit that he did not have any knowledge, whatsoever, of the said transaction, and that he never authorized the purported contracted services to take place. The Mayor also added that he never signed any contract related to the purported services nor did he granted the payment for the supposed 21 consultants. Lim's statement were further reinforced by three of his office staff. They are Rowena Senatin, Helen Natividad and Arturo Mijares.

According to the officials, the names of the consultants that appeared in the payrolls that was submitted to them by some of the members of the accounting and property division of the city of Manila were not included in the list of consultants that were employed by the mayor. The three also confirmed that the consultants were fictitious. This government anomaly is a clear manifestation of the ongoing corrupt practices in the local government of Manila. Nonetheless, like any other forms of illegal activities, the transaction was done in order to benefit the people involved.

The anomalous transaction was carried out and consented by 11 officials from the accounting and property division of the local government of Manila. The officials include Pacifico Lagramada, Yolanda Ignacio, Marleen Young, Gloria Quilantang, Vicky Valientes, Erlinda Marteja, Philip Cabalun II, Cherry Chan, Alicia Moscaya, Fritz Noel Borres, and Rodelio Leyson. The said individuals were responsible for facilitating the payment of the fictitious 21 consultants worth P5,058,000.00 without rendering actual services. Mayor Alfredo Lim and the affidavit of his staffs attested the involvement of the said personnel.

The involved personnel from the accounting and property division of the city of Manila were recommended by Bocolan, in his notice of disallowance, to return the full amount of P5,058,000.00. The said amount was representative of the payment of salaries of the fictitious consultants, who were supposedly contracted by the city mayor. The notice of disallowance given by the Commission on Audit is final and executory under the law, and can only be appealed by the involved participants in the anomalous transaction within six months from the day the notice was filed. Inability to comply to the notice will give the Commission on Audit the power to resort to necessary actions to enforce proper penalties.

Although Mayor Alfredo Lim, in his affidavit, served as the way to expose this particular corrupt activity, it appears that something in this picture does not coordinate. It is known that every local project are needed to be approved by the mayor before it is facilitated; in this instance though, what remains questionable is the fact that the project was not hindered although Mayor Lim said that he did not approved it. While there may have been people held liable for this transaction, the above question is a simple inquiry to further shed light on how the transaction was carried out. This side of the story is something that needs to be clarified to the public.

Some officials from the city of Manila were involved in yet another government anomaly. The Commission on Audit filed a notice of disallowance against 11 Manila officials after deficiencies on the vouchers were found during the auditing process. The voucher contained the alleged consultancy fees of 21 fictitious consultants, who purportedly contracted to work for the office of the Mayor. Mayor Alfredo Lim claimed that he did not sign any contract concerning the appointment of the said consultants.

-Julius Arante

Commission On Audit Filed A Notice Of Disallowances Against Some Manila Officials

The Commission on Audit filed a two-page notice of disallowance last October 29, 2009 against some of the government officials in the city of Manila. The notice was filed following the noted deficiencies on the claims for the payment of consultancy fees of purportedly 21 consultants who were contracted to work for the office of the Mayor. Domingo C. Bocalan Jr., State Auditor IV, who did the auditing of the said vouchers claimed that the 21 names of the consultants included in the payroll submitted for auditing were unreal, and that the contracted services did not took place. Accordingly, the anomalous transaction cost Manila the amount of P5,058,000.00.

The notice of disallowance was filed soon after Mayor Alfredo Lim said in his affidavit that he did not have any knowledge, whatsoever, of the said transaction, and that he never authorized the purported contracted services to take place. As a follow up, Lim also noted that he did not sign any contract for the said services nor did he allowed the fictitious consultants to receive any consultation fees or compensations. The Mayor's statement was backed up by three officers assigned at the city Mayor's office. The three office staff who supported the mayor's statement were Rowena Senatin, Helen Natividad and Arturo Mijares.

According to the officials, the names of the consultants that appeared in the payrolls that was submitted to them by some of the members of the accounting and property division of the city of Manila were not included in the list of consultants that were employed by the mayor. Senatin, Natividad and Mijares also confirmed that consultants in the voucher were inexistent. This government anomaly is a clear manifestation of the ongoing corrupt practices in the local government of Manila. Likewise, this transaction was not necessarily carried out to help the city but a mere justification for the involved personnel to acquire personal gains.

Eleven officials from the accounting and property division of the local government of Manila were named as the persons liable for the said anomalous transaction. They were Pacifico Lagramada, Yolanda Ignacio, Marleen Young, Gloria Quilantang, Vicky Valientes, Erlinda Marteja, Philip Cabalun II, Cherry Chan, Alicia Moscaya, Fritz Noel Borres, and Rodelio Leyson. The said officials consented the release of P5,058,000.00 as a payment to the non-existent consultants for their supposed services to the mayor's office. Mayor Alfredo Lim and the affidavit of his staffs attested the involvement of the said personnel.

The involved personnel from the accounting and property division of the city of Manila were recommended by Bocolan, in his notice of disallowance, to return the full amount of P5,058,000.00. The said amount was representative of the payment of salaries of the fictitious consultants, who were supposedly contracted by the city mayor. The notice given by the Commission of Audit was final, giving the involved officials six months to settle the issue. The inability to comply with the notice will allow the Commission on Audit to take necessary actions in order to settle the issue.

Although the words of Mayor Alfredo Lim may have served as the justification for the named individuals to be held liable by the Commission on Audit, it appears that there is something wrong with this transaction. Considering that all the local projects of Manila are needed to be approved by the mayor, what remains questionable in this instance is the fact that the release of payments was still done in spite of Lim claiming that he did not gave his authority for the said project. While the involved personnel were held liable for this transaction, the fact remains that there is a blind side to this story that remains to be addressed. This side of the story is something that needs to be clarified to the public.

The Commission on Audit filed a notice of disallowance against some of the officials from the local government of the city of Manila. The notice was given as a response to the government anomaly that concerns the payment of P5,058,000.00 among the fictitious 21 consultants who were allegedly contracted to work for the office of Mayor Alfredo Lim. The Commission on Audit recommended the officials to refund the full amount as a means to settle the issue.

-Julius Arante

Fictitious Contracted Services In The City Of Manila Questioned By The Commission On Audit

A two-page notice of disallowance against some of the government officials in the city Manila was released by the Commission on Audit last October 29, 2009. The notice was filed after it was found that the claims for the consultancy payment of the 21 consultants, who were supposedly appointed to work at the office of the mayor, were deficient. Domingo C. Bocalan Jr., State Auditor IV, who did the auditing of the said vouchers claimed that the 21 names of the consultants included in the payroll submitted for auditing were unreal, and that the contracted services did not took place. The illegal transaction was said to have cost the city the amount of P5,058,000.00.

Mayor Alfredo Lim claimed in his affidavit that he have no idea about the said anomalous transaction, which in turn reinforced the Commission on Audit file the notice of disallowance against the involved officials. Lim also said that he has not signed any contract of services suggesting the said consultants' appointment nor did he approved the said entities to collect consultation fees or compensations. Lim's claims in his affidavit were backed up by three of his trusted staff. Ms. Rowena Senatin, Ms. Helen Natividad and Mr. Arturo Mijares were the said officials who attested Lim's words through their affidavits.

The three office staff said in their affidavit that the consultants, whose names appeared in the voucher submitted to them, were never employed by the mayor. The three also confirmed that the consultants were fictitious. Such government anomaly is an indication of the existence of illegal transactions taking place in the local government of Manila. Nonetheless, like any other forms of illegal activities, the transaction was done in order to benefit the people involved.

Eleven officials from the accounting and property division of the local government of Manila were named as the persons liable for the said anomalous transaction. The officials include Pacifico Lagramada, Yolanda Ignacio, Marleen Young, Gloria Quilantang, Vicky Valientes, Erlinda Marteja, Philip Cabalun II, Cherry Chan, Alicia Moscaya, Fritz Noel Borres, and Rodelio Leyson. The said individuals were responsible for facilitating the payment of the fictitious 21 consultants worth P5,058,000.00 without rendering actual services. Mayor Alfredo Lim and his staff confirmed that names of the perpetrators.

The involved personnel from the accounting and property division of the city of Manila were recommended by Bocolan, in his notice of disallowance, to return the full amount of P5,058,000.00. The said amount was the payment for the consultants of the alleged contracted services. The notice given by the Commission of Audit was final, giving the involved officials six months to settle the issue. The inability to comply with the notice will allow the Commission on Audit to take necessary actions in order to settle the issue.

Mayor Alfredo Lim may have given his words in order to justify the existence of this anomalous transaction; still, it cannot be denied that there is something inconsistent about the whole story. It is known that every local project are needed to be approved by the mayor before it is facilitated; in this instance though, what remains questionable is the fact that the project was not hindered although Mayor Lim said that he did not approved it. Although the involved people in this anomalous transaction were already held liable for their corrupt practice, answering this question would somehow shed light to the blind side of the story. Perhaps this question is needed to be answered for the public's understanding.

Some officials from the city of Manila were involved in yet another government anomaly. The Commission on Audit filed a notice of disallowance against 11 Manila officials after deficiencies on the vouchers were found during the auditing process. The voucher contained the alleged consultancy fees of 21 fictitious consultants, who purportedly contracted to work for the office of the Mayor. Mayor Alfredo Lim claimed that he did not sign any contract concerning the appointment of the said consultants.

-Julius Arante

Reynaldo Bagatsing Files Graft And Corruption Charges Against Mayor Alfredo Lim And Allies

Mayor Alfredo Lim is once again placed under public scrutiny after graft charges were filed against him before the Office of the Ombudsman last April 8, 2010. A non-existent local assembly was allegedly conspired by Lim and his allies and also falsified receipts, which is said to have costs the city of Manila worth P221, 250.00. Lim's former legal adviser, Reynaldo L. Bagatsing filed the graft charges against the Mayor and his allies. The complainant, in his affidavit, called forth for the Ombudsman to administer preventive suspension against the involved perpetrators.

Seven officials of the city of Manila were also included in Bagatsing's testimony for their role in the anomaly. The seven were Atty. Rafaelito M. Garayblas, Atty. Analyn T. Marcelo-Buan, Maria Lourdes R. Malulu, Cherry Chao, Cecilia V. Sican, Leanie S. Sanding, and Vicky R. Valientes. Accordingly, in his sworn statement, Bagatsing pointed out that Lim and the said officials' falsified the receipts issued by Angel's Burger House. The plaintiff also said that the Manila officials conspired to make it appear that the Barangay Bureau held a city wide assembly called Barangay Peace Keeping Action Team last August 27, 2009, which Bagatsing have affirmed as a non-existent affair.

In what appears to be another Manila government anomaly, Lim's former legal counsel described in detail how the illegal activity took place. It was said in the statement that in the reimbursement voucher presented by the officials, it was written that 5,500 pieces of cheeseburgers were consumed by the participants in the assembly. What made Bagatsing suspicious of the said transaction was the idea that small burger joints like Angel's is not capable of producing 5,500 cheeseburgers in a day because it would normally take a small burger house 15 days to complete such order. To further reinforce his allegations, Bagatsing was able to acquire the inspection report filed on October 19, 2009 by the officials that was certified by Cecilia V. Sican, Inspector of the City General Services Office (CGSO), which apparently demonstrated that the original receipts that are numbered 0066 and 0067 were falsified to appear as 0214 and 0215.

Due to the receipt forgeries done by the Manila officials, the sum of P221, 250.00 was obtained from the city treasurer of Manila during the reimbursement process. Hence, it is apparent that the involved Manila officials committed malversation and falsification or articles 217 and 171 of the revised penal code respectively. Nevertheless, as this Manila government anomaly that concerns the release of government funds did not underwent proper bidding, the officials also violated the Section 367 of Republic Act. No. 7160 (R.A. 7160). It should be taken into consideration that the amount disembursed and reimbursed by the officials surmount the required amount indicated by Section 367 of R.A. 7160, which specifically points that only P150, 000.00 should be allotted for the procurement of supplies in one month period for all local units of Metropolitan Manila area.

Bagatsing included Mayor Alfredo Lim in his complaint as he was represented in the said illegal transaction by his secretary Rafaelito Garayblas. Lim's secretary signed the false and manufactured documents, thereby giving his authority and consent among the Manila officials who oversee the fruition of this illegal transaction. Although Lim may not have directly signed in this anomalous activity, the mere fact that his secretary has authorized the existence of this corrupt practice with his knowledge makes him liable as well. Nonetheless, considering that Garayblas directly report to Lim, it is apparent that the Mayor condoned such transaction.

With the election already nearing, graft charges are the last thing that any person running for office would wish to be associated with. Considering that Mayor Alfredo Lim has long been a part of Manila's local government, this just means that the people trust his leadership. However, this fraudulent transaction that he and his colleagues are allegedly involved with is a clear manifestation of betrayal of the public's trust. Therefore, it would be best for these officials to clarify the surrounding issues in order to shed light to the questions of the public.

Mayor Alfredo Lim, together with seven other Manila officials, was allegedly involved in another Manila government anomaly that is centered on the falsification and malversation of documents. Lim's former legal counsel, Reynaldo Bagatsing filed the lawsuit before the Ombudsman after he was able to secure evidences to support his claim about the involvement of the said officials and Angel's Burger House.

-Julius Arante

Mayor Alfredo Lim and Other Manila Officials Charged With Graft for Illegal Public Bidding

Graft charges were filed against Manila Mayor Alfredo Lim and some members of the city's Bid and Awards Committee last April 8, 2010. The charges were filed by Reynaldo Bagatsing after allegedly engaging in an unlawful public bidding for the rehabilitation of 15 schools in Manila. The plaintiff took note that the bidding was done to provide unwarranted benefits not only to chosen bidders but also to the officials who officiated the said bidding. Bagatsing also took into account that the bidding prejudiced the local government of Manila as the involved associates were more concerned about the profits that can be reaped from the project rather than the expected results.

Bagatsing's complaint began after he was able to secure an online copy of the bid notice abstract from the Philippine Government Electronic Procurement (PhilGEPS) for the repair of 15 schools within the city of Manila. Bagatsing stated in his sworn affidavit that the bid invitation posted on February 18, 2010 also included details about the filing of letter of intent for interested bidders which were supposedly on February 10-16, 2010""dates that are impossible to comply with as they have already elapsed. The supposed notice for open bidding was in fact a front as another accompanying document request list clearly identified that three entities were already the preferred bidders. The said entities were ALE Builders Construction and Development Corporation, Diamond Head Construction/Supplies, and VITES Construction and Development Corporation.

Atty. Reynaldo Bagatsing, erstwhile friend and legal counsel of Lim, pointed out that the transaction was carried out with undue haste, tagging it as a bidding violation. The swift process of the public building is said to be a violation against the Republic Act NO. 9184 (R.A. 9148) or Government Procurement Reform Act. In accordance to the proofs presented by the complainant, it was apparent that the involved parties were rushing to implement the bidding, which can be seen from the overlapping dates. As such, the actions taken by the participants was a discordance to the implementing rules of R.A. 9148.

Seven other Manila officials were pointed out to have played major roles in carrying out the scheme; most of whom are members of the Bids and Awards Committee. They are Atty. Rafaelito Garayblas, Atty. Renato Dela Cruz, Vicky Valientes, Leanie S. Sanding, Ma. Lourdes Manlulu, Alicia T. Moscaya and Thelma Perez. The members of the committee who acted on their own free will, despite knowing the issues behind the transaction are held responsible for infringing Republic Act No. 3019 (R.A. 3019) or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices and Republic Act No. 6713 (R.A. 6713) commonly referred to as the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees. Mayor Alfredo Lim, who consented to the act, also violated the aforementioned laws.

Accordingly, the rigging of this public bidding to repair and upgrade 15 elementary schools has cost the city of Manila P23,550,000.00. Bagatsing also lamented that by entering into this form of contract, the officials, who acted based on their best interest and gave preference toward their selected bidders chose to deprive the city and its people to save funds which could later on be used for other important projects. The complainant called forth for the Ombudsman to closely examine the existence of these illegal acts. As such, the justice due to the public would be handed to them.

The instances presented clearly points out how local government projects can became an avenue for the perpetration of illegal activities. Although various laws are put in place in order to address these issues, there are still people who continuously participate in the perpetration of fraudulent activities. As such, illegal activities within the government turns into an issue that is too hard to address. In the long run, if this issue is left unattended, the political career of Mayor Alfredo Lim could be jeopardized.

Atty. Reynaldo Bagatsing filed a graft and corruption lawsuits against Mayor Alfredo Lim and other Manila officials last April 8, 2010. The complaint was filed after Bagatsing found strong evidences about the illegal bidding for the rehabilitation of 15 classrooms in the city of Manila. The complainant believes that the bidding violation is detrimental to the city and its citizens.

-Julius Arante

Mayor Alfredo Lim And Colleagues Charged With Graft and Corruption

Mayor Alfredo Lim is once again placed under public scrutiny after graft charges were filed against him before the Office of the Ombudsman last April 8, 2010. Lim allegedly conspired with other Manila officials to a non-existent affair and falsified receipts, which is said to have cost the city of Manila P221, 250.00. Reynaldo L. Bagatsing, Lim's former legal adviser, was the one who filed the lawsuit. Bagatsing called for the Ombudsman to place the perpetrators in a preventive suspension.

Seven officials of the city of Manila were also included in Bagatsing's testimony for their role in the anomaly. They are Atty. Rafaelito M. Garayblas, Atty. Analyn T. Marcelo-Buan, Maria Lourdes R. Malulu, Cherry Chao, Cecilia V. Sican, Leanie S. Sanding, and Vicky R. Valientes. Bagatsing noted in his affidavit that Lim and the other officials altered the original receipts given by Angel's Burger House during their transaction. According to Bagatsing, the falsification of the said receipts were related to the fabricated assembly known as the Barangay Peace Keeping Action Team, which was allegedly spearheaded by the Barangay Bureau in all barangays in Manila last August 27, 2009.

Bagatsing outlined in his complaint how this Manila government anomaly came into fruition. It was said in the statement that in the reimbursement voucher presented by the officials, it was written that 5,500 pieces of cheeseburgers were consumed by the participants in the assembly. What truly bothered the complainant was the fact that such small burger outlet is not capable of producing 5, 500 cheeseburgers in one day, when in reality such delivery could have taken the said burger joint 15 days to complete. To make matters worse based from the inspection report filed on October 19, 2009, which was certified by Cecilia V. Sican, Inspector of the City General Services Office (CGSO), the original receipt numbers provided by the burger joint were 0066 and 0067, a far cry from the receipts and reimbursement voucher handed by the perpetrators to the city treasurer of Manila which were 0214 and 0215.

Due to the receipt forgeries done by the Manila officials, the sum of P221, 250.00 was obtained from the city treasurer of Manila during the reimbursement process. Hence, it is apparent that the involved Manila officials committed malversation and falsification or articles 217 and 171 of the revised penal code respectively. This Manila government anomaly well exemplified that such release of government funds for liquidation associated with the alleged city wide Barangay Peace Keeping Action Team did not conduct the required bidding, proving that the officials failed to adhere to Section 367 of Republic Act No. 7160 (R.A. 7160), otherwise referred to as the local government code of 1991. It should be noted that the P221, 250.00 worth of reimbursement in this transaction exceeded the required amount stated under Section 367 of R.A. 7160, which particularly identified that the procurement of supplies should not exceed the amount of P 150, 000.00 for any items within a month for each of local unit, may it be first or second class cities within the Manila area.

The former legal counsel of Alfredo Lim brought him into charges as he was represented in the said transaction by his secretary Rafaelito Garayblas. Lim's secretary signed the false and manufactured documents, thereby giving his authority and consent among the Manila officials who oversee the fruition of this illegal transaction. Although Lim may not have directly signed in this anomalous activity, the mere fact that his secretary has authorized the existence of this corrupt practice with his knowledge makes him liable as well. Nonetheless, considering that Garayblas directly report to Lim, it is apparent that the Mayor condoned such transaction.

As election is already near, no person running for office would want their names to be involved in an unscrupulous activity. Considering that Mayor Alfredo Lim has long been a part of Manila's local government, this just means that the people trust his leadership. However, this fraudulent transaction that he and his colleagues are allegedly involved with is a clear manifestation of betrayal of the public's trust. Therefore, it would be best for these officials to clarify the surrounding issues in order to shed light to the questions of the public.

Mayor Alfredo Lim and some of his allies are facing graft charges for violating the falsification and malversation law after they allegedly conspire to forge receipts from Angel's Burger House to procure government funds. Reynaldo Bagatsing presented several evidences against this Manila government anomaly, and called for the Ombudsman to place the officials under preventive suspension. Lim was involved in the lawsuit, as he was represented by his secretary Rafaelito Garayblas, who signed the false documents with his consent.

Alfredo Lim and Anomalous Manila Public Bidding For School Rehabilitation

Mayor Alfredo Lim and members of Manila's Bid and Awards Committee are facing graft charges that was filed last April 8, 2010. The complainant, Atty. Reynaldo Bagatsing filed the complaint-affidavit in response to the allegedly illegal public bidding for rehabilitation of 15 schools within the city. The plaintiff took note that the bidding was done to provide unwarranted benefits not only to chosen bidders but also to the officials who officiated the said bidding. Bagatsing also believed that the bidding was especially disadvantageous to the local government of Manila as the participants in the illegal transaction manifested partiality, giving unwarranted benefits to the winning bidders.

Bagatsing's complaint began after he was able to secure an online copy of the bid notice abstract from the Philippine Government Electronic Procurement (PhilGEPS) for the repair of 15 schools within the city of Manila. According to Bagatsing, the invitation to bid was posted on the 18th day of February 2010, but the same post also indicated that interested bidders are given only 8 or 2 days (February 10-16, 2010) from the specified date of notice to submit their letter of intent (LOI) to bid, which was already impossible as the indicated dates have already elapsed. However, instead of openly accepting bids from other interested parties, it was well indicated in the attached document request list that three entities were already the preferred bidders. The said entities were ALE Builders Construction and Development Corporation, Diamond Head Construction/Supplies, and VITES Construction and Development Corporation.

Atty. Reynaldo Bagatsing, former legal counsel of Lim, emphasized that the bidding was done in due haste and identified it as a bidding violation. The instant public bidding is notably an infringement of the Republic Act NO. 9184 (R.A. 9148) or Government Procurement Reform Act. In accordance to the proofs presented by the complainant, it was apparent that the involved parties were rushing to implement the bidding, which can be seen from the overlapping dates. As such, the actions taken by the participants was a discordance to the implementing rules of R.A. 9148.

Most of the key players in the said anomaly are members of the Bids and Awards Committee of Manila. They are Atty. Rafaelito Garayblas, Atty. Renato Dela Cruz, Vicky Valientes, Leanie S. Sanding, Ma. Lourdes Manlulu, Alicia T. Moscaya and Thelma Perez. As most of the involved committee knew the illegalities involved in the bidding transaction, all of the involved officials said to have violated the provisions of Republic Act No. 3019 (R.A. 3019) or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices and Republic Act No. 6713 (R.A. 6713) commonly referred to as the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees. Mayor Alfredo Lim is also held liable for the same violations as he condoned the said acts.

The city of Manila is set to lose P23,550,000.00, associated with this unscrupulous activity. Bagatsing also noted that by associating with such contract, the major players in the bid chose to deprive Manila the opportunity to save funds which could have been used for future projects. He also called for the Obudsman to have this issue examined extensively. As such, the justice due to the residents of Manila would be granted to them.

The instances presented clearly points out how local government projects can became an avenue for the perpetration of illegal activities. Although various laws are put in place in order to address these issues, there are still people who continuously participate in the perpetration of fraudulent activities. Hence, illegal acts become more difficult to resolve. The involvement of Mayor Alfredo Lim in such form of activities could affect his political career if all of these are proven real; but whether or not this is true, such illegal act serves as a proof of the abusive power of men.

Following the discovery of evidences that pointed towards a bidding violation, Atty. Reynaldo Bagatsing filed a complaint-affidavit against Mayor Alfredo Lim and his cohorts in the Bid and Awards Committee of the city of Manila. Aside from the bidding issues, Bagatsing also stated in his sworn affidavit that the involved participants violated the graft and corruption law as well as the ethical standards for public officials and employees.