Case Digest (G.R. No. 206666)
Facts:
In the case of Morong Water District vs. Office of the Deputy Ombudsman, with G.R. No. 116754 dated March 17, 2000, the petitioner, Morong Water District (MOWAD), contested a Resolution from the Office of the Ombudsman dismissing their complaint against Edgard Sta. Maria and Emma Censon for violations of R.A. 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, and Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code concerning malversation of public funds. In the context of the events leading up to the complaint, on August 3, 1992, Sta. Maria received a cash advance of P33,190.73 intended for a pipeline extension project in Morong, Rizal. A partial liquidation was submitted on August 5, 1992, amounting to P15,000.00, claimed to have been used for design services purportedly conducted by Engineer Ricardo Reyes. On November 10, 1992, a final liquidation of P16,790.40 was made, also associated with the project operations.
However, on December 14, 1992, Sta. Maria was ousted from his position as gene
Case Digest (G.R. No. 206666)
Facts:
- Parties Involved
- Petitioner:
- Morong Water District – a government-owned and controlled water utility agency.
- Respondents:
- Private Respondents:
- Edgard Sta. Maria – former General Manager of Morong Water District.
- Emma Censon – advisor of the Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) assigned to Morong Water District.
- Public Respondents:
- Wilfred L. Pascasio
- Raul R. Arnau
- Abelardo L. Aportadera, Jr.
- Francisco Villa
- These public respondents are officials of the Office of the Ombudsman who promulgated the questioned resolution and order.
- Transaction and Liquidation Details
- Cash Advance and Its Purpose:
- On August 3, 1993, petitioner Morong Water District released a cash advance of P33,190.73 to Edgard Sta. Maria to finance the design and execution of the Wawa Pipeline Extension Project in Morong, Rizal.
- Partial Liquidation:
- On August 5, 1992, Sta. Maria submitted a partial liquidation amounting to P15,000.00.
- This liquidation was supported by a journal voucher and a reimbursement expense receipt, wherein Engineer Ricardo Reyes was named as the payee for the design work, including pipelaying schemes and interconnection details.
- Final Liquidation:
- On November 10, 1992, Sta. Maria made a final liquidation of P16,790.40 for the Paglabas Pipeline Extension, noting that the diversion of funds had been authorized by the Board of Directors in a meeting held on October 9, 1992.
- Administrative and Procedural Developments
- Subsequent Developments:
- Sta. Maria was ousted as General Manager on December 14, 1992.
- Filing of Complaint:
- On September 24, 1993, Maximo San Diego, the officer-in-charge of petitioner, filed a complaint before the Office of the Ombudsman-Luzon.
- The complaint charged private respondents Sta. Maria and Censon with violations of R.A. 3019 (the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) and Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code for malversation of public funds.
- Allegations included that the respondents had conspired to misappropriate the funds and falsely represented a payment to Engineer Ricardo Reyes, with supporting documents including affidavits and a certification from LWUA.
- Proceedings of the Office of the Ombudsman
- Resolution and Order:
- On March 28, 1994, the Office of the Ombudsman issued a Resolution dismissing the complaint, finding no sufficient evidence to establish a probable cause for malversation or violation of R.A. 3019.
- On May 27, 1994, after a motion for reconsideration by petitioner, the Office issued an Order that reaffirmed the dismissal.
- The Order noted the absence of new issues or newly discovered evidence in the reconsideration motion.
- It presented an extended discussion emphasizing that documentary evidence (journal vouchers and reimbursement receipts) substantiated proper liquidation of the cash advances.
- It further highlighted that the respondents' version of events was credible and that allegations of conspiracy and the involvement of Emma Censon were unsubstantiated.
- Petition for Certiorari by the Petitioner
- Grounds Raised:
- Petitioner sought to challenge the Office of the Ombudsman’s Resolution and Order on the basis that the Ombudsman acted arbitrarily, whimsically, and with grave abuse of discretion by dismissing the complaint.
- The petitioner argued that the evidence clearly established a prima facie case of malversation, which had been disregarded by the public respondents during the preliminary investigation.
- Nature of the Petition:
- The petition was filed as a challenge to the factual findings of the Ombudsman, despite the established rule that only pure questions of law may be entertained by the Supreme Court when reviewing such decisions.
Issues:
- Abuse of Discretion
- Whether the Office of the Ombudsman acted arbitrarily and with grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the complaint for violation of R.A. 3019 and malversation under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code.
- Sufficiency of Evidence
- Whether the evidence on record, including journal vouchers, reimbursement receipts, and ledger entries, was sufficient to establish a prima facie case for malversation.
- Whether the proper liquidation of the cash advance by the respondents negated the petitioner’s allegations.
- Allegation of Conspiracy and Fictitious Claims
- Whether the alleged conspiracy between Edgard Sta. Maria and Emma Censon to misappropriate the funds is supported by substantial evidence.
- Whether the claim that Engineer Ricardo Reyes is fictitious (based on LWUA certification) is determinative in establishing malversation.
- Requirement of a Demand for Accounting
- Whether it is necessary for the Commission on Audit to make a demand in order for the malversation charge to mature, or if the failure to do so is merely a procedural matter not affecting the substance of the charge.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)