Case Digest (G.R. No. 153304-05)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Hon. Sandiganbayan (Fourth Division), Imelda R. Marcos, Jose Conrado Benitez and Gilbert C. Dulay, G.R. Nos. 153304-05, February 07, 2012, the Supreme Court En Banc, Brion, J., writing for the Court.
The criminal informations arose from alleged anomalous disbursements under the Ministry of Human Settlements (MHS) programs (Kilusang Sariling Sikap/KSS and Kabisig) in 1984–1985. The respondents charged were Imelda R. Marcos (then Minister of Human Settlements), Jose Conrado Benitez (then Deputy Minister), and, in separate counts, Gilbert C. Dulay and Rafael Zagala (both MHS finance officers); Dulay remained at large and Zagala later died. The offence charged was malversation of public funds under Article 217, paragraph 4 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended.
The cases were filed and tried before the Sandiganbayan, Fourth Division, which conducted a joint trial. The prosecution’s primary evidence was the testimony of Commission on Audit (COA) Auditor Iluminada Cortez and documentary exhibits (Treasury Warrants, disbursement vouchers, bank checks and related schedules). The prosecution alleged (a) that P100 million released for the KSS project resulted in P60 million in cash advances (P40 million to Zagala; P20 million to Dulay) without proper liquidation after the KSS fund was declared “confidential,” and (b) that P42.4 million for Kabisig (subdivided into P21.6M, P3.8M and P17M) was transferred to the University of Life (UL) but not accounted for by UL or the MHS, with purchases ostensibly made and registrations irregularly in UL’s name.
After the prosecution rested on Auditor Cortez’s testimony, demurrers to evidence were filed by Zagala and the respondents (dates: November 15, 1997; January 5 and 28, 1998). On January 27, 1998 the special prosecutor filed a Manifestation of non-opposition to the demurrers. The Sandiganbayan granted the demurrers and, in its March 22, 2002 Fourth Division decision (penned by Justice Narciso S. Nario; concurring: Ferrer, Leonardo‑de Castro, Cortez‑Estrada; dissent: Palattao), acquitted the respondents for insufficiency of evidence.
The People filed a petition for certiorari with this Court (Rule 65) challenging the Sandiganbayan’s grant of the demurrers and claiming (1) denial of the State’s ri...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the State deprived of its right to due process by the conduct (omissions) of the special prosecutor in the Sandiganbayan proceedings?
- Did the Sandiganbayan commit grave abuse of discretion in granting the respondents’ demurr...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)