Jaca V People
Jaca V People
_______________
* SECOND DIVISION.
271
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 1 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
272
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 2 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
expertise on the matter, the presumption is that official duty has been
regularly performed unless there is evidence to the contrary.―The
COAÊs findings are accorded great weight and respect, unless they
are clearly shown to be tainted with grave abuse of discretion; the
COA is the agency specifically given the power, authority and duty
to examine, audit and settle all accounts pertaining to the revenue
and receipts of, and expenditures or uses of fund and property
owned by or pertaining to, the government. It has the exclusive
authority to define the scope of its audit and examination, and to
establish the required techniques and methods. An audit is
conducted to determine whether the amounts allotted for certain
expenditures were spent wisely, in keeping with official guidelines
and regulations. Under the Rules on Evidence and considering the
COAÊs expertise on the matter, the presumption is that official duty
has been regularly performed unless there is evidence to the
contrary. The petitioners failed in this regard.
Criminal Law; Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. No.
3019); Elements of.―Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 has „three
elements: (1) the accused is a public officer discharging
administrative, judicial, or official functions; (2) [he or she] must
have acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or [gross and]
inexcusable negligence; and (3) [his or her] action caused any undue
injury to any party, including the government, or [gave] any private
party unwarranted benefits, advantage, or preference in the
discharge of his or her functions.‰
Public Officers; Republic Act No. 7160; City Treasurers; City
Accountants; The City Treasurer is tasked with, inter alia, the
following duties: (1) to take custody of and exercise proper
management of the funds of the local government unit concerned;
and (2) to take charge of the disbursement of all local government
funds and such other funds the custody of which may be entrusted to
him by law or
273
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 3 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
274
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 4 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
275
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 5 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
276
BRION, J.:
Before the Court are the petitions for review on
certiorari1 assailing the December 16, 2004 decision2 and
the February 1, 2005 resolution3 of the Sandiganbayan in
Criminal Case No. 24699, finding Alan C. Gaviola, Edna J.
Jaca, Eustaquio B. Cesa (collectively, petitioners) and
Benilda N. Bacasmas guilty of violating Section 3(e) of
Republic Act (RA) No. 3019.4
Antecedent Facts
1. Processing of payment:
a. Paymasters request for cash advance and prepare
cash advance disbursement vouchers (voucher) to be
submitted to the Chief Cashier, as head of Cash Division;
b. Chief Cashier
_______________
1 Under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. Rollo (G.R. No. 166967), pp. 31-
56; Rollo (G.R. No. 166974) pp. 3-61; Rollo (G.R. No. 167167), pp. 11-77.
2 Rollo (G.R. No. 166974), pp. 60-94.
3 Id., at pp. 95-114.
4 Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Pursuant to the CourtÊs April
4, 2005 resolution, the cases of Gaviola and Cesa were consolidated; Rollo
(G.R. No. 167167), p. 9.
5 Rollo (G.R. No. 167167) p. 357; Rollo (G.R. No. 166974) p. 6.
6 Rollo (G.R. No. 167167), p. 14.
7 Rollo (G.R. No. 166967), p. 33.
277
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 6 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
278
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 7 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
8 Per Order No. 98-001, dated March 5, 1998; Rollo, (G.R. No.
166967), p. 34.
9 Rollo, (G.R. No. 166974), pp. 7-8.
10 To prevent the possible loss of records, funds and other official
documents, the audit team sealed the vault and other fixtures inside
BadanaÊs office cubicle and its door. For failure of Badana to report back
for work, Cebu City Mayor Alvin Garcia created a committee to open
BadanaÊs sealed vault and receptacles. On March 11, 1998, the committee
broke the seal and opened the fixtures inside BadanaÊs cubicle in the
presence of the media and the Cebu City government officials. The
committee turned over the cash they found to the City Cashier. (Rollo
[G.R. No. 166967], p. 35).
279
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 8 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
11 Id., at p. 62.
12 Ordaining and Instituting a Government Auditing Code of the
Philippines.
13 Local Government Code of 1991.
14 Rollo (G.R. No. 166967), p. 71.
15 Rollo (G.R. No. 167167), pp. 138-139.
16 Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and
Employees.
17 Docketed as OMB-VIS-CRIM-980221 and OMB-VIS-ADM-98-0150;
Rollo (G.R. No. 167167), p. 20. The administrative case was filed by the
Commission on Audit, Regional Office No. VII against the petitioners
and several other local officials, including Badana.
18 Id., at p. 142.
280
That on or about the 5th day of March 1998, and for [sometime]
prior thereto, at Cebu City, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction
of this Honorable Court, above-named accused, public officers,
having been duly appointed to such public positions above-
mentioned, in such capacity and committing the offense in relation
to Office, conniving and confederating together and mutually
helping xxx each other, with deliberate intent, with manifest
partiality, evident bad faith and with gross inexcusable negligence,
did then and there allow Rosalina G. Badana, Cashier I of the Cebu
City Government to obtain cash advances despite the fact that she
has previous unliquidated cash advances, thus allowing Rosalina G.
Badana to accumulate Cash Advances amounting to
P18,522,361.96, Philippine Currency, which remains unliquidated,
thus accused in the performance of their official functions, had
given unwarranted benefits to Rosalina G. Badana and themselves,
to the damage and prejudice of the government, particularly the
Cebu City Government.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 9 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
19 Dated May 14, 1998. Docketed as Criminal Case No. 24699; id., at
p. 20.
20 Id., at p. 143.
21 Rollo (G.R. No. 166967), p. 36.
281
282
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 10 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
283
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 11 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
284
285
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 12 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
22 Records, Exhibit „F,‰ pp. 7-12.
23 Records, Volume II, p. 142.
24 Id., at p. 171.
286
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 13 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
25 On September 13, 1999; Rollo (G.R. No. 166974), p. 9.
26 Upon motion of the prosecution, the petitioners were placed under
preventive suspension; Rollo (G.R. No. 167167), p. 21.
27 Records, Volume II, p. 14.
28 Rollo, (G.R. No. 166967), p. 63.
29 Rollo, (G.R. No. 167167), pp. 360-361.
287
SandiganbayanÊs Ruling
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 14 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
30 Id., at p. 361.
31 On August 16, 2001; Rollo (G.R. No. 166974), pp. 553-572.
32 Supra note 2.
288
_______________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 15 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
289
_______________
36 Rollo (G.R. No. 166967), p. 137.
37 See Section 455 of RA No. 7160.
290
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 16 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
38 Rollo (G.R. No. 166967), p. 128.
39 Id., at p. 138.
40 TSN, Volume 16, p. 20.
41 Rollo (G.R. No. 166974), p. 110.
291
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 17 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
42 Under Section 348 of RA No. 7160.
43 Rollo, (G.R. No. 166967), p. 115.
44 Rollo, (G.R. No. 166974) pp. 107-108.
45 Citing Duterte v. Sandiganbayan, 352 Phil. 557; 289 SCRA 721
(1998).
292
d. Evidence
The petitioners argue that the prosecution witnesses
were incompetent to testify. On the one hand, Ariesga did
not actually prepare the COA Report, but merely received
it from the persons who did the actual audit and thereafter
submitted it to the COA Regional Office. On the other
hand, while Chan is the head of the audit team, she did not
actually conduct the cash examination and audit of
BadanaÊs accountabilities. In view of the incompetence of
the prosecution witnesses, the Sandiganbayan should not
have admitted, much less relied on, the COA Report as its
contents are all hearsay.
e. Proof beyond reasonable doubt
and the elements of Section 3(e) of
RA No. 3019 were not established.
Since the petitioners received no prior notice of
disallowance from the auditors of the COA at the time
material to the controversy, then the petitioners could not
have been charged with knowledge of BadanaÊs previous
unliquidated cash advances. This lack of knowledge
negates the element of „giving unwarranted benefits or
causing undue injury.‰46
Particularly, Cesa argues that the existence of
unliquidated cash advances was not established because
there has been no complete cash examination, audit and
post audit of BadanaÊs accountability, citing Madarang v.
Sandiganbayan.47 Neither was „undue injury‰ established
since, as previously argued, the COA Report is hearsay.
Also, the fact that no government employee complained of
not being paid his salary/receivables only shows that no
party was ever unduly injured.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 18 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
46 See Uriarte v. People, G.R. No. 169251, December 20, 2006, 511
SCRA 471, 486.
47 407 Phil. 846; 355 SCRA 525 (2001).
293
OSPÊs Comment
The Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) prays for the
denial of the petitions on the ground that the issues raised
in the petitions are factual in nature and, hence, not
covered by Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. The OSP defends
the validity of the information, arguing that there is
nothing inconsistent in the allegations because gross
inexcusable negligence also connotes conscious indifference
to duty, and not mere inadvertence. While conspiracy
necessitates intent, conspiracy does not negate gross
inexcusable negligence, as recognized in Sistoza v.
Desierto.48
On the merits, the OSP asserts that no amount of good
faith can be appreciated for adhering to a practice if this
practice is illegal. As a certified public accountant and a
former state auditor himself, CesaÊs familiarity with the
pertinent laws and regulations should have cautioned him
against making a certification in Box A.
Delay in the payment of salaries cannot be used as an
excuse to violate the law and pertinent COA regulations.
JacaÊs repeated certification in Box B of the vouchers
despite the lack of liquidation of prior cash advances
establishes her gross inexcusable negligence in the
performance of her duties.
Unlike in Sistoza, the vouchers Gaviola signed: (i) were
on their face palpably irregular for lack of entries required
by law―i.e., the net amount of payroll to be paid, the
intended payees and the period covered by the payroll; and,
(ii) lacked supporting documents. Gaviola failed to
substantiate his claim that he signed the vouchers with
supporting documents. None of the documents alleged to
have supported the vouchers were presented. In contrast,
ChanÊs finding and unbiased testimony (that the vouchers
were signed without supporting documents) enjoy the
presumption of regularity.
_______________
48 437 Phil. 117, 122, 132; 388 SCRA 307, 328 (2002).
294
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 19 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
Our Ruling
_______________
49 Among the exceptions are: (1) the conclusion is a finding grounded
entirely on speculations, surmise[s], and conjectures; (2) the inference
made is manifestly mistaken; (3) there is grave abuse of discretion; (4)
the judgment is based on misapprehension of facts; and [(5)] the findings
of fact of the Sandiganbayan are premised on the absence of evidence and
are contradicted by evidence on record. (Pareño v. Sandiganbayan, 326
Phil. 255, 279; 256 SCRA 242, 265 [1996]).
295
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 20 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
50 Section 14, Article 3 of the 1987 Constitution reads:
Section 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal
offense without due process of law.
(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed
innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be
heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of
the accusation against him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial,
to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to
secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his
behalf. However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding
the absence of the accused: Provided, that he has been duly notified and
his failure to appear is unjustifiable.
51 The law in effect when the information was filed.
52 1985 Rules of Criminal Procedure, as amended, Rule 110, Section
6.
53 1985 Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 110, Section 9. See
Fernando Q. Miguel v. The Honorable Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 172035,
July 4, 2012, 675 SCRA 560.
54 Ibid.
296
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 21 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
55 201 Phil. 379; 115 SCRA 793 (1982).
56 Supra note 46 at pp. 487-488.
57 Umipig v. People, G.R. No. 171359, July 18, 2012, 677 SCRA 53.
297
_______________
58 Sison v. People, G.R. Nos. 170339 and 170398-403, March 9, 2010,
614 SCRA 670, 680 citing Fonacier v. Sandiganbayan, 238 SCRA 656,
687-688.
59 Siztoza v. Desierto, supra note 48, at p. 132; p. 326. See also De la
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 22 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
Victoria v. Mongaya, 404 Phil. 609, 619-620; 352 SCRA 12, 20 (2001).
60 Vacio v. People, G.R. Nos. 177105-06, August 4, 2010, 626 SCRA
782.
61 In fact, in Alvarez v. People (G.R. No. 192591, June 29, 2011, 653
SCRA 52, 59), the Court sustained the SandiganbayanÊs ruling that the
accused „acted with manifest partiality and gross inexcus-
298
_______________
able negligence in awarding the BOT contract to an unlicensed and
financially unqualified private entity.‰ In Siztoza v. Desierto, supra note
48, at p. 131; p. 325, the Supreme Court observed that:
And, while not alleged in the Information, it was evidently the
intention of the Ombudsman to take petitioner to task for gross
inexcusable negligence in addition to the two (2) other modalities
mentioned therein. At any rate, it bears stressing that Sec. 3, par. (e), RA
3019, is committed either by dolo or culpa and although the Information
may have alleged only one (1) of the modalities of committing the offense,
the other mode is deemed included in the accusation to allow proof
thereof. [italics supplied]
62 See Socrates v. Sandiganbayan, 324 Phil. 151, 177-181; 253 SCRA
773, 794 (1996).
299
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 23 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
63 Law of the case has been defined as the opinion delivered on a
former appeal. More specifically, it means that whatever is once
irrevocably established as the controlling legal rule or decision between
the same parties in the same case continues to be the law of the case,
whether correct on general principles or not, so long as the facts on which
such decision was predicated continue to be the facts of the case before
the court. As a general rule, a decision on a prior appeal of the same case
is held to be the law of the case whether that question is right or wrong,
the remedy of the party deeming himself aggrieved being to seek a
rehearing (Tolentino v. Loyola, G.R. No. 153809, July 27, 2011, 654 SCRA
420, at 430-431).
64 Rules of Court, Rule 130, Section 36.
65 Anna Lerima Patula v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 164457,
April 11, 2012, 669 SCRA 135.
66 Oscar M. Herrera, Remedial Law, Volume VI, p. 261.
67 TSN, Volume 1, December 8, 1999, pp. 16-17.
300
Q: Were you actually the one who conducted the cash examination?
A: I assisted Mrs. Cecilia Tantengco in the cash counts and in the
gathering of the documents and also in the preparation of the
report.
Q: You assisted Mrs. Tantengco?
A: Yes sir.
Q: You did not assist any City Auditors office of Cebu City?
A: Being a team leader, I assisted members of the team.
xxxx
AJ Nario: What kind of assistance have you made?
A: During the cash examination I reviewed the working papers of the
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 24 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
68 TSN, Volume 7, August 10, 2000, pp. 10-12.
301
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 25 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
prosecutionÊs evidence
Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 has „three elements: (1) the
accused is a public officer discharging administrative,
judicial, or official functions; (2) [he or she] must have
acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or [gross
and] inexcusable negligence; and (3) [his or her] action
caused any undue injury to any party, including the
government, or [gave] any
302
_______________
69 Estino v. People, G.R. Nos. 163957-58 and 164009-11, April 7, 2009,
584 SCRA 304, 316.
70 Supra note 47, at pp. 629-630; p. 535.
71 G.R. No. 96915, July 3, 1992, 211 SCRA 171.
72 Id.
303
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 26 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
73 Id., at pp. 174-175.
74 243 Phil. 626; 161 SCRA 694 (1988).
304
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 27 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
75 Box of Disbursement Voucher.
76 It may not be amiss to point out, too, that violation of Section 89 of PD
No. 1445 is in itself an offense punishable under Section 128 of the same law.
The mere failure to timely liquidate the cash advance is the gravamen of the
offense (People v. Sandiganbayan [Third Division], G.R. No. 174504, March 21,
2011, 645 SCRA 726, 734). The criminal liability that may be incurred by the
accountable officer under the law emphasizes the importance of complying with
the limitation in granting cash advances.
305
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 28 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
Q: Yes.
A: It is the written request of the paymaster concerned, sir. We
practice that so long ago, sir. It is only the written request of
the paymaster, no other requirements was required by us.
Q: How about those payrolls, are these payrolls attached to that
voucher?
xxxx
AJ Ferrer: The question is very simple, the voucher is prepared in your
office and then it is sent to the accountant. Now, the question is,
when you sent the vouchers to the accountant, is it
accompanied by the payrolls, yes or no?
Witness: No your Honor.
Atty. Abrenica: Only the vouchers were transmitted to the accountant
for approval, without any attachment?
A: That is prepared by the paymaster.
306
1. x x x
6. Box A shall be signed by the responsible officer having
direct supervision and knowledge of the facts of the
transaction.79
_______________
77 TSN Volume 12, February 27, 2002, pp. 38-41.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 29 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
307
_______________
80 Ferrer, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 161067, March 14, 2008, 548
SCRA 460, 466-467; Paredes, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan, 322
308
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 30 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
Phil. 709, 730; 252 SCRA 641, 657 (1996); and Tan v. Commission on
Elections, G.R. No. 112093, October 4, 1994, 237 SCRA 353, 359.
81 Nicolas v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 175930-31 and 176010-11,
February 11, 2008, 544 SCRA 324, 346-347; See also Constantino v.
Sandiganbayan (First Division), G.R. Nos. 140656 and 154482,
September 13, 2007, 533 SCRA 205, 229.
309
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 31 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
salaries of other employees despite the fact that you are aware that
it also contains cash advances being requested by Rosalina Badana,
you have to sign it notwithstanding the fact that you know, you are
aware that the previous one were still unliquidated? You have to
sign it?
E. JACA
Yes, your honor.
CHAIRMAN
Will you please tell us why you have to do that? Could you not
make any qualification? Can you not say that I am signing the box
just for the release of the salaries of the employees but with respect
to Rosalina Badana, you are objecting to the additional cash
advances being requested? Can you not say that?
E. JACA
Precisely, it is because, your Honor, our records which COA insisted
should be effective tool for monitoring. It is simply not effective, the
index cards and subsidiary ledgers.
CHAIRMAN
Can you not execute additional documents to that effect saying that
I have to sign it because I have to do it. If not, it will affect the
salaries of other employees but, with
_______________
310
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 32 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
311
E. JACA
It was only at that time that these were brought out and the COA
mentioned that these devices are supposed to be our controls.
CHAIRMAN
DonÊt you feel that the amount of P18M is already substantial
enough for you to blow the whistle?
E JACA
That P18M, sir, came out after the cash examination of Badana.
During those years, during the months preceding that, we did not
know. There was no way of knowing at our end how much has
Badana incurred.83
_______________
312
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 33 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
a pay period.
3. The cash advance shall be supported by the following documents:
- Payroll or list of payees with their net payments
4. The accountable officer shall liquidate his cash advance as follows:
salaries, wages, etc.―within five days after each 15 day/end of the
month pay period.
_______________
85 Section 305 of RA No. 7160 reads:
Section 305. Fundamental Principles.―The financial affairs,
transactions, and operations of local government units shall be governed
by the following fundamental principles:
xxxx
(l) Fiscal responsibility shall be shared by all those exercising
authority over the financial affairs, transactions, and operations of
the local government units[.]
86 It was only on February 7, 1994 that the Cebu City government
created the new Office of the City Accountant pursuant to Section 474,
paragraph (a) of RA No. 7160. It was created precisely to assist the local
chief executive „in managing the resources to its optimum use through
proper accounting‰ (http://www.cebucity.gov.
ph/deptsoffices/support/accountant) last accessed November 19, 2012.
313
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 34 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
87 Director Villanueva v. Commission on Audit, 493 Phil. 887, 899-
901; 453 SCRA 782, 796 (2005).
88 259 Phil. 794; 180 SCRA 309 (1989).
89 Ibid.
314
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 35 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
90 Id., at pp. 801-802; pp. 315-316.
91 Magsuci v. Sandiganbayan, a case involving estafa through
falsification of public documents.
92 Leycano, Jr. v. Commission on Audit, 517 Phil. 428; 482 SCRA 215
(2006); Albert v. Chairman Gangan, 406 Phil. 235; 353 SCRA 673 (2001).
93 Alfonso v. Office of the President, G.R. No. 150091, April 2, 2007,
520 SCRA 64, 66.
315
_______________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 36 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
316
_______________
97 See also Dugayon v. People, 479 Phil. 930, 941; 436 SCRA 262, 271
(2004).
98 504 Phil. 321, 334-335; 467 SCRA 52, 65 (2005).
99 See also Santillano v. People, G.R. Nos. 175045-46, March 3, 2010,
614 SCRA 164.
100 Rollo (G.R. No. 166974), p. 311.
317
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 37 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
101 This sets GaviolaÊs case apart from Dr. Alejandro v. People, 252
Phil. 412; 170 SCRA 400 (1989). In Alejandro, the Court acquitted the
petitioner-accused who merely relied on the certifications of his
subordinates. Whether the supporting documents are in order or
complete is not a factual issue in Alejandro.
318
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 38 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
102 TSN, Volume 15, pp. 29-31; Volume 13, p. 13.
103 Magsuci v. Sandiganbayan, 310 Phil. 14, 20; 240 SCRA 13, 18
(1995).
319
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 39 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
104 Supra note 48, at p. 316.
105 Guy v. People, G.R. Nos. 166794-96, 166880-82 and 167088-90,
March 20, 2009, 582 SCRA 107, 125.
320
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 40 of 41
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 689 29/01/2018, 8:46 PM
_______________
106 Decision of Sandiganbayan, Rollo (G.R. No. 167167), p. 110.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016141e8c7c24615bd6d003600fb002c009e/p/ARP806/?username=Guest Page 41 of 41