G.R. No. 191015 - People vs. Go

Several joint affidavit-complaints were filed in December 1998 by local government officials of the Municipality of Castillejos, Zambales, alleging malversation of public funds through falsification of public documents.
The allegations centered on the disbursement of public funds via fabricated or “ghost” projects—including the upgrading of barangay roads and the construction of market stalls—and the falsification of supporting documents related to these projects.

Disbursement Voucher No. 101-9803-328 for funds amounting to ₱166,242.72 (upgrading of barangay roads in Barangays Looc, Nagbayan, Magsaysay, and San Pablo).
Disbursement Voucher No. 101-9803-349 for funds amounting to ₱154,634.27 (upgrading of barangay roads in Barangays Looc proper, Nagbayan proper, and San Pablo-Sitio Isidro).
Disbursement Voucher No. 101-9804-415 for funds amounting to ₱90,464.21 (construction of market stalls in the public market).

The support documents, including programs of work, certificates of inspection and acceptance, purchase orders, and receipts, were allegedly falsified:

Documents were inadequately prepared, antedated, or incomplete.
Required signatures of the municipal accountant and the local budget officer were absent or improperly affixed by unauthorized persons.

The accused public officers were Teofilo G. Pantaleon, Jr. (Municipal Mayor) and Jaime F. Vallejos (Municipal Treasurer).
Other persons implicated included Ken Swan Tiu and Engineer Rainier J. Ramos, with varying allegations of participation.
The Office of the Special Prosecutor, the Ombudsman, and the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon endorsed the filing of Informations for malversation before the Sandiganbayan on March 10, 2000.
Prior to trial, the accused were preventively suspended and several motions—including for reconsideration and for withdrawal of appeal—were filed over the subsequent years.

The prosecution presented numerous witnesses (e.g., Engr. Ramos, Aurelio, Nida, Alberto, Engr. Soliven, and others) who testified on:

Defense witnesses, including Vallejos, Pantaleon, and others, testified in an attempt to explain the absence of necessary signatures and to assert that the projects had been implemented or were authorized.
Evidence highlighted that funds disbursed from the municipality’s development fund were released even though the supporting documents showed significant irregularities and omitted required pre-audit certifications.

The Sandiganbayan (Fourth Division) rendered its decision on February 4, 2003, convicting the accused in Criminal Cases Nos. 25861-63 beyond reasonable doubt.
The decision imposed penalties of reclusion perpetua, perpetual special disqualification, and fines corresponding to the amounts malversed.
Subsequent motions for reconsideration, a motion for a new trial, and petitions involving jurisdictional issues were filed, with the appellate process culminating in this Court’s affirmation of the conviction for Jaime F. Vallejos, while the appeal for Pantaleon had been previously withdrawn.

Whether the acts committed by the municipal mayor and the municipal treasurer—specifically, the signing of disbursement vouchers and antedated programs of work lacking the requisite pre-audit signatures—constituted malversation of public funds through falsification of public documents under Article 217 in relation to Articles 48 and 171 of the Revised Penal Code.

Whether the documentary irregularities (e.g., absence of proper signatures, alteration of dates, incomplete supporting documents) were sufficient to establish that the alleged projects were fictitious and that public funds were misappropriated.

Whether the combined actions of the accused, which included ordering the preparation of antedated documents and signing irregular vouchers, demonstrate a conspiracy and the requisite mens rea (intent or negligence) needed for the crime of malversation.

Whether the evidence presented by the prosecution was enough to meet all the essential elements required by law for both malversation and falsification.

Whether the absence of a restitution notice from the Provincial Auditor and the claimed ministerial nature of the accused’s functions can nullify or diminish the criminal liability of the accused under the applicable laws.

Whether the Sandiganbayan properly exercised its jurisdiction over the case given the positions held by the accused and applicable provisions on jurisdiction in cases involving public officers.