Case Dismissed against PNOC-EC and Pionaire for Alleged Anti-Graft Law Violations and Grave Misconduct

Pionaire Finance Limited.

The PNOC-EC is a government-owned and controlled corporation while Pionaire is a foreign company registered in the British Virgin Islands. Both of these companies engage in petroleum trade internationally.

The Respondents were charged in connection with the PNOC-EC Boards passage of a resolution authorizing the PNOC President/CEO to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Pionaire involving a joint business venture in international petroleum trade.

In these cases, complainant failed to substantiate his allegations that respondents committed the criminal offenses charged.

The Ruling is stated as follows:

  • The charge for violation of Section 3 (a) of R.A. No. 3019 against the respondent PNOC President/CEO failed because there was no evidence presented showing that he persuaded, induced, or influence his co-respondents to approved the Resolution.

  • The charge for violation of Section 3 (e) of R.A. No. 3019 failed because there was no evidence presented showing that public respondents caused undue injury to the government or any party or gave Pionaire unwarranted benefits, advantage, or preference.

  • The charge for violation of Section 3 (g) of R.A. No. 3019 failed because their was no evidence presented showing that the MOU was manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to the Government.

  • The charge for violation of Section 3 (i) of R.A. No. 3019 failed because there was no evidence presented showing that public respondents directly or indirectly had become interested, for personal gain, or had material interest in any transaction or act requiring their approval.

  • The charge for violation of Section 3 (j) of R.A. No. 3019 failed because there was no evidence presented showing that public respondents knowingly approved or granted any license, permitm privilege, or benefit in favor of Pionaire.

The complaint filed against the respondents was dismissed March 28 in the Office of the Ombudsman, Quezon City, Philippines by Graft Investigation and Prosecution Officer II John Paul Galang and approved by Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales.

An Ombudsman case for violation of Section 3 (a), (e), (g), (i) and (j) of R.A. No. 3019 and Grave Misconduct filed by Complainant Mr Bernardo V. Lopez has been dismissed against the Respondents PNOC President, PNOC Board of Directors and the Chairman and CEO of Pionaire Finance Limited.

The PNOC-EC is a government-owned and controlled corporation while Pionaire is a foreign company registered in the British Virgin Islands. Both of these companies engage in petroleum trade internationally.

The Respondents were charged in connection with the PNOC-EC Boards passage of a resolution authorizing the PNOC President/CEO to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Pionaire involving a joint business venture in international petroleum trade.

In these cases, complainant failed to substantiate his allegations that respondents committed the criminal offenses charged.

The Ruling is stated as follows:

  • The charge for violation of Section 3 (a) of R.A. No. 3019 against the respondent PNOC President/CEO failed because there was no evidence presented showing that he persuaded, induced, or influence his co-respondents to approved the Resolution.

  • The charge for violation of Section 3 (e) of R.A. No. 3019 failed because there was no evidence presented showing that public respondents caused undue injury to the government or any party or gave Pionaire unwarranted benefits, advantage, or preference.

  • The charge for violation of Section 3 (g) of R.A. No. 3019 failed because their was no evidence presented showing that the MOU was manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to the Government.

  • The charge for violation of Section 3 (i) of R.A. No. 3019 failed because there was no evidence presented showing that public respondents directly or indirectly had become interested, for personal gain, or had material interest in any transaction or act requiring their approval.

  • The charge for violation of Section 3 (j) of R.A. No. 3019 failed because there was no evidence presented showing that public respondents knowingly approved or granted any license, permitm privilege, or benefit in favor of Pionaire.

The complaint filed against the respondents was dismissed March 28 in the Office of the Ombudsman, Quezon City, Philippines by Graft Investigation and Prosecution Officer II John Paul Galang and approved by Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales. 

OMBUDSMAN CLEARS PNOC EC PRESIDENT AND CEO PEDRO A. AQUINO JR. AND THE MEMBERS OF THE PNOC EC BOARD INCLUDING PIONAIRE FINANCE LIMITED

PIONAIRE FINANCE LIMITED