Title
Source: Supreme Court
Department of Fice-Revenue Integrity Protection Service vs. Office of the Ombudsman
Case
G.R. No. 238660
Decision Date
Feb 3, 2021
A security guard faced charges for undeclared assets in SALNs; Ombudsman dismissed falsification claims and ruled some charges prescribed. Supreme Court upheld, citing lack of duty and prescription periods.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 238660)

Findings of Non-Disclosure

Germar declared only three of seven properties (residential lot, piggery, apartment) without true valuations. He also answered “No” to being formally charged in his 2014 Personal Data Sheet despite a prior robbery information.

Ombudsman Ruling on Probable Cause

The Ombudsman found probable cause to charge Germar with:

  1. Violation of RA 6713 Section 8 for non-disclosure of six properties in SALNs (2008–2014)
  2. Perjury under RPC Article 183 for false statements in SALNs (2006–2014) and in the 2014 PDS
    It dismissed:
  • RA 6713 counts for 2002–2007 and RPC Article 183 counts for 2002–2005 (prescription)
  • RPC Article 171 falsification count (statements not “absolutely false”)
  • RA 3019 Section 7 and other falsification counts

Issues Brought Before the Supreme Court

  1. Whether the Ombudsman gravely abused discretion by dismissing Article 171 falsification charges
  2. Whether counts under RA 6713 (2002–2007) prescribed
  3. Whether Article 183 perjury counts (2002–2005) prescribed

Elements of RPC Article 171 Falsification

RPC Art. 171 requires:

  1. Public officer status
  2. Taking advantage of official position in preparing the document
  3. Making absolutely false statements
    The Court held Germar lacked “advantage of position” over SALNs, which are required of all employees, thus no falsification probable cause.

Prescription Under RA 6713 and Act No. 3326

RA 6713 violations prescribe in eight years (Act 3326, Sec. 1(c)). Prescription runs from the date of commission—here, the date of SALN filing. SALNs are public records available for inspection, negating “blameless ignorance.” Counts for non-disclosure in 2002–2007 SALNs thus prescribed.

Prescription for RPC Article 183 Perjury

Perjury under Art. 183 carries a correctional penalty prescribing in ten years (RPC Art. 90) from discovery (RPC Art. 91). Discovery occurs on SALN filing, which is subject to review. Counts for non-disclosure in 2002–2005 SALNs prescribed after ten years; the lifestyle check and complaint (2015–2016) occurred beyond that period.

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.