The Office of the Cebu City Prosecutor has dismissed the perjury and falsification case filed by Dumaguete City Administrator Atty. Neil Ray Lagahit against the person who accused him and Mayor Manuel “Chiquiting” T. Sagarbarria of nepotism before the Office of the Ombudsman, citing insufficient evidence.
The resolution, docketed under NPS Docket No. VII-09-INV-26H-03061, is dated October 2, 2026, and was promulgated on October 14, 2026. It was signed by Assistant City Prosecutor Julse G. Bacolod and approved by Deputy City Prosecutor Maria Theresa B. Calibugan Casiño, officer-in-charge of the Office of the Cebu City Prosecutor.
What Lagahit Alleged Against the Complainant
Lagahit had argued that the complainant — the individual who filed the Ombudsman complaint against him and the mayor — lied under oath in that filing. According to the resolution, Lagahit maintained that he never recommended or endorsed the appointment of Magnus Kenneth N. Lucas at City Hall, and that his signatures on the appointment papers served only to certify that Civil Service requirements had been met.
Lagahit further alleged that the complaint quoted a certification he said he never signed, which he presented as evidence of deliberate falsification.
Complainant Cited Typing Error, Denied Bad Faith
The complainant countered that his statements were grounded in his understanding of Lagahit’s role as head of the city’s Human Resource Management Office and on Lagahit’s signatures appearing on the appointment papers. He acknowledged that the quoted certification in the complaint contained an error, but attributed it to a typographical mistake — noting that the actual document had been attached to the complaint as a supporting exhibit.
The complainant also argued that the case filed against him by Lagahit constituted retaliation for the Ombudsman complaint.
Prosecutor: No Proof of Deliberate Falsehood
The Cebu City Prosecutor’s Office found that the evidence presented by Lagahit did not meet the legal threshold required to sustain a perjury charge. According to the resolution, proving perjury requires establishing that a false statement was made intentionally — a standard that was not met by the circumstances of the case.
The prosecutor ruled that a wrongly quoted document does not, on its own, prove that the error was deliberate. Similarly, Lagahit’s signatures on the appointment papers were found insufficient to prove endorsement of the appointment, but were consistent with how the complainant arrived at his conclusions about Lagahit’s role.
Both the perjury and falsification charges were dismissed for insufficient evidence. The resolution notes the complainant’s retaliation argument but clarifies that the dismissal rests solely on the evidentiary finding.
Ombudsman Nepotism Case Remains Open
The Ombudsman complaint against Mayor Sagarbarria and Administrator Lagahit — docketed as OMB-V-C-MAY-26-0129 and OMB-V-A-MAY-26-0169 — remains pending as of press time. No decision has been issued by the Ombudsman on those cases.
The prosecutor’s resolution is limited in scope: it addresses only the perjury and falsification charges that Lagahit filed and does not make any finding on whether nepotism occurred. That determination remains with the Office of the Ombudsman.
It is not yet known whether Lagahit will seek reconsideration of the dismissal or file an appeal.
Photo credit: Photo from Breaking News Negros Oriental
Related stories
