LUNA, Apayao – The Acting Provincial Prosecutor of Apayao recently dismissed for lack of probable cause the estafa, falsification of public documents and use of falsified documents filed against some thirteen officials of the regional and provincial offices of the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) and some officials of Kabugao town in relation to the conduct of the free and prior informed consent (FPIC) resulting to the favorable endorsement of the 150-megawatt Gened-1 hydroelectric power project.
In a 13-page resolution approved by Acting Provincial Prosecutor Reynold Bulawayan Alunday, the NCIP and Kabugao officials who were cleared of the said charges were NCIP-CAR Acting Regional Director Atty. Atanacio Addog, NCIP-Apayao FPIC team members Engr. Benito Bangao, Engr. Kenny Pulog, Fritzie Depdepen and Carla Dazzle Marie Mallilin, NCIP Apayao Provincial Officer Agnes Gabuat, NCIP Provincial Legal officer Atty. Geoffrey Calderon, NCIP Apayao CDO III Engr. Genaro Failoga, Acting Head of NCIP Kabugao Service Center Jazryl Inopia, NCIP Kabugao Service Center TAA I Carter Ayabo, Kabugao IPMR John Anthony Amid, Kabugao Vice Mayor Fabulous Tucjang, Hector Tahiyam, and several Jane and John Does.
The resolution stated that after a thoroughly discerned evaluation of all the pieces of evidence presented before the Acting Provincial Prosecutor, as well as the execution of the affidavit of desistance by one of the complainants which casts doubt as to the veracity of the allegations of the entire complaint, the investigating prosecutors recommended the dismissal of the cases against all the respondents.
It added that the basic rule is that mere allegation is not evidence and is not equivalent to proof where it springs from the rule that the one who alleges a fact has the burden of proving it.
“We therefore conclude that the respondents acted in good faith without any sign of intent to commit a crime or to cause damage to the people of Apayao,” the resolution stated.
The resolution noted that despite the presence of some of the complainants during the meeting that resulted in the approval of the consent resolution for the project, none of them raised any objection to the approval of the said resolution.
Earlier, some of the Isnag tribe of barangay Poblacion, Kabugao alleged that on November 19, 2022, they were shown a document entitled ‘A Resolution Constituting/Naming as their Representatives in negotiating with the Pan Pacific Energy Corporation Anent the Latter’s Proposed 150mw Hydroelectric Dam within their Ancestral Domain’ which appears to have been executed on December 23, 2019.
In the said resolution, Aristone Dangao, Reynaldo Talimbong, marked as deceased and replaced by one Erlinda Eaquebel, Ernesto Buggay, Crisostomo Dangao, Benito Tallong, Maila Alluba, Bernarda Gumidan, Jariel Enciso, Monaliza Sibayan and the complainants Cariaga Pallat, Ramos Bongui, Colombus Basan and Angelo Umingle, were authorized to act as the representatives of the indigenous peoples of barangay Poblacion in negotiation with the company. It likewise appeared in the said resolution that as a consensus, they are now open to negotiation with the company thereby revoking their previous resolution of no to negotiation.
By virtue of the said resolution, Aristone Dangao, Erlinda Esquebel, Crisostomo Dangao and Benito Tallong, entered into a memorandum of agreement on April 20,2022 between the Isnag cultural communities, including barangay Poblacion with the Pan Pacific Renewable Power Phils. Corp. concerning the implementation of the Gened-1 hydro project. The other authorized representatives who did not affix their signatures in the said MOA executed a joint affidavit as to that effect which they submitted to the NCIP Kabugao Service Center on April 28, 2021.
The complainants alleged that they did not execute or sign in the assailed December 23, 2019 Community Resolution No. 01. According to them, some signatures appearing are falsified and the attachments were allegedly meant as an attendance sheet for a different purpose.
Further, the complainants claimed that it was Kabugao IPMR Amid and Vice Mayor Tucjang who submitted the resolution before the NCIP Kabugao Service Center. It was then received by its acting head, Inopia and in spite of the glaring evidence that the signatures were falsified, the NCIP used the same to support the MOA.
Engr. Bangao denied the allegations of the complainants, naming him as one of the principals who actively participated in the falsification of public documents involving several records of the FPIC. He stated that he was added as one of the respondents because of his alleged membership in the FPIC team that conducted the process and that because his name appears in the FPIC report that recommended for the issuance of the certification precondition in favor of the renewable energy company. He alleged that he was never involved in the actual conduct of the FPIC process or in any activity relating to the said process.
Gabuat, Calderon, Failoga, Pulog, Depdepen and Mallilim denied the allegations against them stating that they were just discharging their ministerial duties and functions in facilitating and documenting the FPIC process, and that they do not have discretionary powers. They pointed out that it is not the NCIP which determines or identifies the authorized elders/leaders who shall represent the community in the FPIC process, especially for negotiations and signing of MOA if there be any. It is the sole discretion of the community. What the NCIP did was just to validate them by way of requesting from them a community resolution naming, identifying and the like of their authorized representatives. And to ensure that the elders attending the negations and memorandum signing are authorized, part of prudence on the respondent’s part is to ask the community a written community bestowal of authorization, hence, they requested for a community resolution.
For their part, Peralta and Ayabo also reiterated their defense similar to the ones earlier stated by the NCIP FPIC team.
On October 14, 2015, an application for FPIC was filed by the PPRPPC at the NCIP-CAR for its proposed hydro power plant in Pudtol, which overlaps the ancestral domains of the Isnags of Kabugao.
On December 20, 2019, an assembly was conducted in barangay Badduat, Kabugao where community members from the different barangays were present, hence, it was suggested and agreed upon to come up with a resolution per barangay naming/instituting elders/leaders as representatives in the negotiation with the proponent of the project.
The resolution stipulated that the crime imputed against the respondents arose from the execution of a community resolution, Resolution No. 01, series of 2019, dated December 23, 2019, which identified and named 13 elders/leaders of Poblacion, Kabugao to represent the indigenous peoples in negotiating with the proponent in connection worth the hydro power project. The resolution was apparently signed by more than 300 residents.
According to the resolution, the only act allegedly committed by the respondents which gave rise to the filing of the complaint is the alleged falsification of the signatures of some of the complainants in the assailed resolution.
From the documents presented, the acting provincial prosecutor noted, among others, that there are more than 300 signatories in the assailed resolution; there are 28 legitimate complainants in the case; among the 28 complainants, only 8 of them are alleged to have never affixed their signatures in the assailed resolution; there are 13 identified and named authorized representatives of Poblacion, Kabugao in the said resolution and among the 13 authorized representatives, only 4 of them affixed their signatures in the agreement.
The resolution explained that the assailed resolution is a private document and material to the case is the determination of what kind of document was falsified, In the said case, the assailed resolution is not a written official act, it was not notarized and it is not required by law to be kept in the country as public record, thus, there is no probable cause for falsification and use of falsified documents.
The resolution emphasized that after an exhaustive reading of the affidavits and attached documents of both parties, the acting provincial prosecutor found insufficient evidence to hold any of the respondents for any of the crimes imputed against them.
Since the document that is falsified is a private document and that the investigating prosecutors cannot ascertain the damage or any intent to cause damage by any of the respondents, the complaint must fail.
The complainants may have pointed out the material differences between their signatures as compared to what were attached in the assailed resolution, however, they failed to prove that it was the respondents who actually forged their signatures. The allegations and documentary evidence submitted by the complainants failed to positively identify the respondents as the authors of the falsification.
