The Sandiganbayan has dismissed all graft charges against former Cebu City Mayor Michael Rama in connection with the city’s multi-million-peso garbage procurement contracts, extending its earlier dismissal ruling to him and rejecting the prosecution’s attempt to revive the cases.
In an 11-page resolution dated July 16, 2026, the anti-graft court’s Seventh Division dismissed three counts of violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act filed against Rama.
The court also denied the prosecution’s Motion for Reconsideration seeking to overturn its June 2, 2026 ruling that dismissed the same charges against Rama’s co-accused.
The ruling ordered the release of the cash bonds posted by Rama and his co-defendants and lifted all Hold Departure Orders issued against them.
Rama welcomed the decision, saying he received the news while attending a fiesta mass with his family at Our Lady of Mt. Carmel.
“Sometimes surprises come any day and at any time,” Rama said in a statement.
He said his wife received a message from their lawyers informing them that both his case and those of his colleagues had been dismissed.
The cases stemmed from three solid waste management contracts worth nearly P45 million awarded in December 2021 to Jomara Konstrukt Corp., ACM Hauling Services, and ARN Central Waste Management Inc. after Typhoon Odette caused widespread damage in Cebu City.
The prosecution alleged that the city improperly used negotiated procurement instead of competitive public bidding, resulting in undue advantage to the private contractors.
The Sandiganbayan, however, ruled that the amended charges filed by the prosecution remained “fatally infirm,” stressing that violations of procurement rules do not automatically constitute criminal graft.
“Mere awarding of contract to the private contractors is not illegal per se as it is an integral part of the procurement process,” the court said.
The court added that the prosecution should have stated specific facts showing that the awarding of contracts was illegal, irregular, or overtly unlawful.
Although Rama did not separately file a motion to quash after the prosecution amended the charges and instead entered a conditional plea of not guilty, the court ruled that the dismissal should also apply to him.
The court cited Section 9, Rule 117 of the Rules of Court, which states that an accused may still challenge an information if the facts alleged do not constitute an offense.
Since Rama was charged as part of an alleged conspiracy with the five members of the city’s Bids and Awards Committee (BAC), the court ruled that defects in the prosecution’s charges must also benefit him.
The cleared BAC members were Dominic A. Diño, Janeses B. Ponce, Leizl J. Calamba, Conrado A. Ordesta III, and Lyndon Bernardo J. Basan.
The Sandiganbayan also criticized the prosecution for failing to provide the “ultimate facts” of the alleged crime and relying instead on legal conclusions and alleged administrative violations.
The court cited the Supreme Court ruling in Paguirigan v. People, which emphasized that criminal charges must contain enough details to inform the accused of the allegations against them.
It also pointed out that the prosecution failed to include the private contractors who allegedly received the supposed unwarranted benefits in the conspiracy charge.
Following the ruling, Rama and his family described the decision as a vindication of their faith in the justice system.
Rama’s son, Cebu City Councilor Mikel Rama, thanked supporters and prayer partners while reflecting on the legal battle faced by their family.
He said the family continued to respect the judicial process despite what they described as difficult circumstances.
“The truth and justice will always prevail,” Councilor Rama wrote.
Photo by Kaiser Jan Fuentes
Comments