G.R. No. 172602 - Go vs. Sandiganbayan

Motion for Reconsideration and arguments of the Office of the Special Prosecutor

The Office of the Special Prosecutor filed a Motion for Reconsideration asserting that private persons who conspire with public officers may be held liable under Section 3(g) of R.A. No. 3019, citing Meneses v. People, Balmadrid v. Sandiganbayan, Domingo v. Sandiganbayan, and Singian v. Sandiganbayan.
The motion persuaded the Court to take a second look at the case and the applicable law.

Court's statement of the elements of the offense under Section 3(g) of R.A. No. 3019

The Court reiterated that to be indicted under Section 3(g) of R.A. No. 3019 the following elements must be present: (1) the accused is a public officer; (2) he entered into a contract or transaction on behalf of the government; and (3) such contract or transaction is grossly and manifestly disadvantageous to the government.
The Court also held that, if conspiracy is alleged, a private person may be held liable together with the public officer, consistent with the Act's avowed policy "to repress certain acts of public officers and private persons alike which may constitute graft or corrupt practices or which may lead thereto."

The Information charged Vicente C. Rivera, Jr., then Secretary of the Department of Transportation and Communications, with violating Section 3(g) of R.A. No. 3019 "in conspiracy with accused HENRY T. GO, Chairman and President of Philippine International Air Terminals, Co., Inc. (PIATCO)."
The Court cited Estrada v. Sandiganbayan to hold that an allegation of conspiracy need not recite particulars when conspiracy is alleged only as the mode of commission; it is sufficient to allege conspiracy by using the word "conspire" or by stating basic facts with sufficient precision to enable a plea.

On March 18, 2008, the Sandiganbayan granted Vicente C. Rivera, Jr.'s "Motion to Dismiss by way of Demurrer to Evidence" and rendered the following dispositive order:

"WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, accused Vicente C. Rivera, Jr.'s 'Motion to Dismiss by way of Demurrer to Evidence', dated September 8, 2007, is hereby GRANTED. Criminal Case No. 28092 for violation of Section 3(g) of Republic Act No. 3019, is ordered DISMISSED and accused VICENTE C. RIVERA, JR., is hereby ACQUITTED of the offense charged. The cash bond posted by the accused to secure his provisional liberty is hereby ordered returned to him, subject to the usual accounting and auditing procedures. The Hold Departure Order issued by this Court against the accused dated February 15, 2005, is lifted and set aside. There can be no pronouncement as to civil liability as the facts from which the same might arise were not proven in the case at bar. SO ORDERED."

The Office of the Special Prosecutor filed a petition for certiorari in this Court captioned People v. Sandiganbayan and Rivera, docketed as G.R. No. 185045.
On December 3, 2008, this Court dismissed the petition for certiorari for failure to show grave abuse of discretion, finding the Sandiganbayan's dec...(Subscriber-Only)

Whether a private person may be held liable under Section 3(g) of R.A. No. 3019 when alleged to have conspired with a public officer.

Whether an allegation that an accused acted "in conspiracy with" a public officer is sufficient in form and substance under the Rules of Court and controlling precedent such as Estrada v. Sandiganbayan.

Effect of acquittal of the public officer co-accused on the private co-accused

Whether the acquittal and dismissal of proceedings against the public officer co-accused removes the factual and legal basis for charging the private co-accused with conspiracy under Section 3(g) of R.A. No. 3019.

(Subscriber-Only)