Cebu port chief denies bias, says complainant misleading Ombudsman

MANILA, Philippines — The suspended chief of the Cebu Port Authority (CPA) dismissed the allegations against him of being biased in port operations, further saying that the complainant was misleading the Office of the Ombudsman.

The Ombudsman placed CPA General Manager Francisco Comendador III under a preventive suspension of up to six months over alleged grave misconduct and gross neglect of duty in connection with the complaints filed by the Oriental Port and Allied Services Corp. (OPASCOR).

READ: CPA GM Commendador: I will comply with Ombudsman suspension order

Article continues after this advertisement

Comendador maintained, in his 21-page motion for reconsideration, that there was insufficient evidence that points to him favoring a private operator.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“The Complaint’s baseless theory that Respondent’s actions resulted in preferential treatment in favor of CSHCTC (Cebu South Harbor and Container Terminal Corp.), is wholly unsubstantiated and collapses when measured against the objective record,” he stated in the motion.

The OPASCOR alleged that the Cebu port chief was allowing vessels to make use of the CSHCTC, a 25-hectare private international commercial port, despite the restrictions under CPA Administrative Order No. 02-2010.

The policy, also known as the Omnibus Policy and Guideline on the Development, Construction and Operation of Private Ports within the Territorial Jurisdiction of the CPA, regulates the development, construction, and operation of private ports within its jurisdiction.

However, for Comendador, the private commercial port is not exclusive and “may serve general port users.”

Article continues after this advertisement

He asserted that the case against him was based on a “mistaken premise”. 

“In sum, the Complaint is premature and contravenes settled administrative doctrines; the finding of ‘strong evidence of guilt is conclusory, unsupported, and bereft of substantial evidentiary basis; the charges are directly refuted by documentary and independent objective evidence on record,” Comendador said.

Article continues after this advertisement

Comendador’s suspension order, dated Aug. 20, was immediately executory and would not be interrupted by any motion, appeal, or petition that the respondent may file, unless otherwise ordered by the Ombudsman or by any court of competent jurisdiction.

He previously said that he would comply with the Ombudsman’s order “to ensure the integrity and impartiality of the investigation.” /mr