Case Title: JOEL NEMENSIO M. MACASIL,* PETITIONER, VS.

FRAUD AUDIT AND

INVESTIGATION OFFICE (FAIO) - COMMISSION ON AUDIT, PUBLIC ASSISTANCE
AND CORRUPTION PREVENTION OFFICE OMBUDSMAN - VISAYAS REGIONAL
OFFICE NO. VIII, AND OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN (VISAYAS), RESPONDENTS.
Case Number: G.R. No. 226898

Date: May 11, 2021

Division or EN BANC: EN BANC

Facts of the Case:

 On February 7, 2005, the Commission on Audit Regional Office No. VIII

investigated the infrastructure projects of the Tacloban City Sub-District
Engineering Office for calendar years 2003 and 2004. Based on the audit
investigation, the review of the projects cannot be completed due to delay
and non-submission of contract documents. Accordingly, the Regional
Legal and Adjudication Office (RLAO) issued notices of suspension to the
responsible officers, directing them to submit the required documents.
Upon compliance, the RLAO reviewed the documents and discovered that
several projects bore identical, if not exact, descriptions. The RLAO
considered this as red flag and recommended for an in-depth audit
investigation. Later, the Fraud Audit and Investigation Office (FAIO)
examined the transactions and found that 32 infrastructure projects did not
comply with approved plans and were overpaid due to bloated
accomplishment reports,overstated resulting in overpayment in the
amount of P52,178,645.18. Moreover, the reported actual
accomplishments for two projects amounting to P 1,972,962.00 were not
properly identified during the ocular inspection; while one project was
found out not in accordance with DPWH Highway Design and
Standards.
 On the basis of the FAIO's findings, the Public Assistance and Corruption
Prevention Office Fact-Finding Unit filed a Complaint[5] against Materials
Engineer Joel Nemensio M. Macasil (Macasil) and other officials for
violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act (RA) No. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and
 Corrupt Practices Act and Falsification under Article 171 of the Revised
Penal Code (RPC) before the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman Visayas.
Allegedly, Macasil certified that the Statements of Work Accomplished
(SWA) for 32 infrastructure projects were in accordance with the approved
plans and specifications, despite the fact that the reported
accomplishments were overstated/bloated, and that the projects were
overpaid.
 Macasil denied the charges and averred that, as a Materials Engineer, his
work revolves around the quality control aspect of the infrastructure
projects, such as quality control testing, sampling, and pre-testing of
construction materials. On the other hand, the FAIO inspection reports
focused on the quantity aspect. Specifically, Engr. Owen Kim S. Monter, a
member of the investigating team, stated that "[t]he conduct of inspection
was limited only to the existence of visible portion of the project as
physically examined and validated by the undersigned"[7] and that the
"inspection was focused on the verification of [the] quantity."[8] Moreover, it
is the Project Engineer who certifies the SWAs. Macasil also disavowed
any participation in the alleged overpayment of the projects as he was not
part of the team that recommended payment of the contract price to the
contractors. He also did not sign any disbursement voucher. Lastly, he was
not included in the fact-finding phase of the investigation, and was not
named in the notice of suspension. He only came to know of the
investigation and the adverse findings when he received a copy of the
complaint.
 On May 8, 2015, the Office of the Ombudsman (Visayas) found probable
cause to indict Macasil for 23 counts of violation of Section 3(e) of RA No.
3019, and 26 counts of Falsification of Public Documents under paragraph
4, Article 171 of the RPC, for participation in signing in each of the SWAs
and DV for the 34 infrastructure projects per Finding No. 3 of the FAIO
Report No. 2011-02 that are considered by complainant FAIO as either
bloated or overstated as regards the extent of the project accomplishment.
Moreover, of the 49 infrastructure projects subject of the case, 31 projects
were shown to be irregular and had sufficient evidence showing Violation of
Section 3(e) of RA 3019, as amended. 34 projects were likewise shown to
 be irregular and had sufficient evidence for Falsification of Public Document
under Article 171, paragraph 4 of the Revised Penal Code.
 A Motion for Reconsideration was filed but the same was denied.
 A Petition for Certiorari was filed before the Supreme Court imputing grave
abuse of discretion on the part of the Ombudsman (Visayas) in finding
probable cause for violation of Section 3(e) of RA No. 3019, as amended,
and paragraph 4, Article 171 of the RPC.

RULING: The petition is meritorious. Considering that Macasil is a Materials Engineer of

the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) of Tacloban City and is
performing governmental functions for the benefit of the public. Foremost, the SWAs
attached to the records would reveal that Macasil was not the officer who certified the
percentage of completion of the infrastructure projects and their compliance with the
approved plans and specifications. The SWAs contained three certifications signed by
the contractor, the project engineer, and the materials engineer. The foregoing
notwithstanding, it must be kept in mind that the overall supervision of the project shall
be the responsibility of the Project Engineer. Macasil's name appears on the third
certification which guarantees the quality of the materials used, and the fact that such
materials underwent and passed the required tests. Pertinently, the DPWH Staffing
Manual enumerates the duties and responsibilities of a Materials Engineer. Similarly,
there is no probable cause to charge Macasil with falsification under paragraph 4,[30]
Article 171, of the RPC. The Ombudsman's finding that Macasil made an untruthful
statement when he certified in the SWAs that the reported and paid accomplishments of
the infrastructure projects were in accordance with the approved plans and
specifications is not moored on evidence. As intimated earlier, Macasil did not certify on
the work accomplished for the infrastructure projects nor was he the responsible officer
to make such certification. To stress, Macasil is a Materials Engineer who only certified
on the quality of the materials incorporated into the projects, and their compliance with
the requirements of the DPWH Standard Specifications for Highways, Bridges, Airports,
and the schedule of Minimum Testing Requirements. More importantly, criminal intent
must be present in felonies committed by means of dolo, such as falsification. However,
there was nothing willful or felonious in Macasil's actions that satisfies the requisite
criminal intent or mens rea. In sum, there is no prima facie case to support a finding of
probable cause for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and
Falsification, it bears emphasis that the primary objective of a preliminary investigation
is to free, respondent from the inconvenience, ignominy, and stress of defending himself
in the course of a formal trial. It also protects the state from the burden of the
unnecessary expense and effort in prosecuting alleged offenses, and in holding trials
arising from false, frivolous, or groundless charges.[33] Thus, when at the outset the
existence of probable cause to form a sufficient belief as to the guilt of the accused
cannot be ascertained, the prosecution must desist from inflicting on any person the
trauma of going through a trial. FOR THESE REASONS, the petition is GRANTED. The
Consolidated Resolution dated May 8, 2015 of the Office of the Ombudsman (Visayas)
in OMB-V-C-13-0355 and OMB-V-C-14-0012, finding probable cause against Joel
Nemensio M. Macasil for violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 and
paragraph 4, Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code is ANNULLED and SET ASIDE.