Case Digest (G.R. No. 238660) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In the petition Department of Finance – Revenue Integrity Protection Service v. Office of the Ombudsman and Clemente del Rosario Germar (G.R. No. 238660, February 3, 2021), the petitioner DOF-RIPS challenged the Office of the Ombudsman’s June 15, 2017 Resolution and November 8, 2017 Order in OMB Case No. C-C-16-0224. Private respondent Germar served as a Bureau of Customs security guard from April 1, 1979 until his resignation on October 16, 2015. Pursuant to Investigation Authority No. 108-2014-9-24BC, DOF-RIPS conducted a lifestyle check, comparing his SALNs (2002–2014) with records from the BIR, LRA, LTO, SEC and DTI. The review uncovered seven real properties registered in his name and two donated to his daughter in 2015 that were not fully declared in his SALNs or PDS. In May 2016, DOF-RIPS filed complaints before the Ombudsman for: (i) violation of Section 8 of RA 6713; (ii) violation of Section 7 of RA 3019; (iii) Falsification under Article 171, RPC; and (iv) Perjury und Case Digest (G.R. No. 238660) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Antecedents
- Clemente del Rosario Germar served as a security guard of the Bureau of Customs from April 1, 1979 until his resignation on October 16, 2015.
- Pursuant to Investigation Authority No. 108-2014-9-24BC (September 3, 2015), the Department of Finance–Revenue Integrity Protection Service (DOF-RIPS) conducted a lifestyle check of Germar’s assets, liabilities, net worth, business interests and financial connections.
- Lifestyle check findings
- Comparison of Germar’s 2002–2014 SALNs with records from the BIR, LRA, LTO, SEC and DTI revealed seven real properties in his name (plus two donated to his daughter in 2015) that were not declared or undervalued.
- Germar declared only three properties in his SALNs and answered “NO” to item 37(a) in his 2014 PDS regarding formal criminal charges, despite a dismissed robbery charge on record.
- Proceedings before the Ombudsman
- In May 2016, DOF-RIPS filed a complaint with the Office of the Ombudsman (OMB) for violation of Section 7, RA 3019; Section 8, RA 6713; falsification under Article 171 RPC; and perjury under Article 183 RPC.
- The OMB’s Resolution (June 15, 2017) found probable cause for Section 8, RA 6713 (2008–2014) and Article 183 RPC (2006–2014 SALNs; 2014 PDS), but dismissed:
- The OMB denied DOF-RIPS’s partial motion for reconsideration (November 8, 2017).
- Petition for Certiorari
- DOF-RIPS filed before the Supreme Court to challenge the OMB’s Resolution and Order.
- The petition raised three issues: falsification dismissal, prescription of RA 6713 charges, prescription of Article 183 charges.
Issues:
- Did the Ombudsman gravely abuse its discretion in dismissing the charge of falsification under Article 171 RPC?
- Did the Ombudsman gravely abuse its discretion in ruling that RA 6713 violations (2002–2007) have prescribed?
- Did the Ombudsman gravely abuse its discretion in ruling that perjury charges under Article 183 RPC (2002–2005) have prescribed?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)