G.R. No. 180661 - Antiquera y Codes vs. People

Petitioner: Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), the constitutional central monetary authority created under Republic Act No. 7653 (The New Central Bank Act).
Respondent: Benjamin M. Jamorabo, former Bank Officer I of BSP’s Supervision and Examination Sector (SES).
BSP filed a complaint on August 11, 2009, against Jamorabo before the Office of the Ombudsman alleging violation of Section 27(d) of R.A. No. 7653 and BSP Office Order No. 423, series of 2002, for obtaining a loan from the Rural Bank of Kiamba, Sarangani, Inc. (RBKSI) during the bank’s regular examination from July 6 to 22, 2006.

During the RBKSI examination on July 17, 2006, Jamorabo took an unsecured P200,000 loan from RBKSI, promising the bank president and manager to settle the loan before the next BSP general examination (held every two years).
The loan did not undergo regular bank procedures: no collateral or documentary proof of income was required, and the loan was approved to Jamorabo despite RBKSI’s initial intention to deny it due to fear of offending Jamorabo.
Jamorabo issued eight post-dated personal checks totaling the loan amount but identified his wife as the principal borrower and listed himself as co-maker. His wife neither signed nor appeared before RBKSI during the loan application.
The loan proceeds were deposited into Jamorabo’s account, but he defaulted starting with the third amortization; his checking account was closed by September 2007.

Jamorabo promised later in 2008 to settle the loan but failed to do so. The loan came to light during the April 2009 regular examination of RBKSI, when the bank disclosed the loan to BSP examiners.
BSP’s investigation confirmed Jamorabo’s involvement and classified the loan as a violation of Section 27(d) of R.A. No. 7653.
The Ombudsman dismissed the complaint on February 9, 2011, ruling that Section 27(d) violations entail only administrative liability and that Jamorabo could no longer be sanctioned administratively as he retired on December 31, 2008.
The Ombudsman also found no violation of Section 3(e), R.A. No. 3019, due to lack of proof of damage or injury to the government, as the loan had been fully paid.
BSP moved for reconsideration, which the Ombudsman denied on July 28, 2011; BSP then filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court.
It was discovered during the proceedings that Jamorabo had migrated to Canada in 2010 with no intention of returning.

Whether violation of Section 27(d), R.A. No. 7653, entails administrative liability only, or whether it also constitutes criminal liability.

Whether Jamorabo can still be held administratively liable despite the complaint being filed after his retirement.

Whether there is a prima facie case against Jamorabo for violation of Section 3(e), R.A. No. 3019 (Anti-Graft Law).