Case Digest (G.R. No. 179333)
Facts:
In 1991, the Republic of the Philippines, through the Presidential Commission on Good Government, filed a Complaint for “Accounting, Reconveyance, Forfeiture, Restitution, and Damages” with the Sandiganbayan – First Division in Civil Case No. 0003 to recover ill-gotten assets allegedly amassed during the Marcos administration. Among the respondents was Geronimo Z. Velasco, then President of the Philippine National Oil Company (PNOC), and his nephew, Alfredo R. De Borja. The Republic alleged that Velasco diverted the five-percent “address commissions” payable by vessel owners under PNOC charters by instructing brokers to hand sealed envelopes containing money to Epifanio F. Verano, PNOC’s vice president, for delivery to De Borja who, in turn, funneled the funds through Decision Research Management Company. Verano admitted delivering two sealed envelopes without knowing their contents or confirming their receipt by De Borja. Another purported proof, the affidavit of Jose M. Reyes,Case Digest (G.R. No. 179333)
Facts:
- Parties and Background
- The Republic of the Philippines (Petitioner), through the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), filed Civil Case No. 0003 before the Sandiganbayan (SB) for “Accounting, Reconveyance, Forfeiture, Restitution, and Damages” against various respondents, including Alfredo R. De Borja (Respondent).
- De Borja is the nephew of Geronimo Z. Velasco, former PNOC President and Chairman of the Board.
- Allegations and Factual Antecedents
- PNOC entered into vessel charter agreements under which vessel owners paid a 5% “address commission” to PNOC; under Velasco’s instructions, this provision was changed to “as agreed upon” and commissions were diverted to Decision Research Management Company (DRMC).
- Petitioner alleged De Borja acted as Velasco’s dummy/nominee/agent, receiving sealed envelopes of commissions on Velasco’s behalf, based on the testimony of Epifanio F. Verano and an affidavit of Jose M. Reyes.
- Procedural History Before Sandiganbayan
- Petitioner filed its Formal Offer of Evidence on March 6, 1995, presenting Verano’s testimony and Reyes’s affidavit (latter never testified due to death).
- On April 15, 2005, De Borja filed a Demurrer to Evidence, asserting petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case against him.
- The SB granted the Demurrer on July 31, 2008, finding Verano lacked personal knowledge of envelope contents or confirmation of delivery and Reyes’s affidavit inadmissible hearsay; it denied reconsideration on March 25, 2009.
- Petitioner filed a Petition for Review under Rule 45 before the Supreme Court, which raised issues of procedural compliance and the merits of evidence.
Issues:
- Propriety of the SB’s Granting of the Demurrer to Evidence
- Whether the evidence presented—Verano’s testimony and Reyes’s affidavit—was legally sufficient to establish a prima facie case against De Borja.
- Whether the SB incorrectly dismissed petitioner’s claims for lack of preponderant evidence.
- Mootness and Procedural Compliance
- Whether the petition became moot by subsequent dismissal of Civil Case No. 0003 as to other respondents.
- Whether petitioner’s failure to submit proof of service on the SB warranted dismissal of the appeal.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)