Cagayan Vice Governor Suspended for 90 Days Over Graft Charges

BATAC, Ilocos Norte, Philippines – Cagayan Vice Governor Manuel Mamba has been suspended for 90 days by a local court as he faces trial for alleged violation of Republic Act (RA) 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. The ruling, dated July 28, was issued by Judge Felix Salvador of the Batac Regional Trial Court Branch 17, granting a motion filed by the complainants – Cagayan third district Rep. Joseph Lara, his wife Zarah, and their lawyer Victorio Casuay. The court denied Mamba’s motion to quash the information. According to the court, suspension is permissible under Section 13 of RA 3019 once a valid information is filed and an arrest warrant is issued against the defendant. The suspension does not necessarily constitute a finding of guilt but is intended to prevent the defendant from intimidating witnesses and tampering with records and evidence. Records show that on March 26, the RTC found probable cause to charge Mamba for allegedly violating Section 3(f) of RA 3019 and issued a warrant for his arrest. Mamba posted bail on March 30 before the 7th Municipal Circuit Trial Court in Piat-Sto. Niño, Cagayan. The charges stem from a complaint filed by the Lara couple, owners of JLL Pulsar Construction, which handled several infrastructure projects when Mamba was governor. The complainants allege that despite repeated demands, the provincial government under Mamba's leadership refused to release payment for the contract. Mamba's camp, however, stated that the contractor refused to personally receive payment in the form of checks, a policy imposed by the provincial government for projects flagged by the capitol’s inspectorate team. Mamba asserted that the policy requiring contractors to personally claim checks was intended to protect public funds and ensure projects met government standards. He added that he has yet to receive an official copy of the court order and intends to appeal the suspension. In the context of Philippine local politics, allegations of graft and corruption often surface in disputes over public contracts and project implementation. This case highlights how disagreements over payment and project oversight can escalate into legal battles and administrative sanctions for public officials.