Case Summary (G.R. No. 174730-37)
Petitioners and Respondent
• Petitioners: Paulino S. Ong and Rosalio S. Galeos (and the late Federico T. Rivera, dismissed posthumously).
• Respondent: The People of the Philippines, represented by the Office of the Ombudsman and the Sandiganbayan.
Key Dates
• April 16, 1986: Ong appointed OIC‐Mayor of Naga, Cebu.
• 1988–1998: Ong’s tenure as elected Mayor.
• June 1, 1994: Permanent appointments of Galeos and Rivera.
• 1993–1996: Years covered by the Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs) at issue.
• August 11, 2000: Ombudsman approves filing of criminal charges.
• August 18, 2005: Sandiganbayan Decision convicting petitioners.
• February 9, 2011: Resolution of consolidated Supreme Court petitions.
Applicable Law
• 1987 Philippine Constitution (decision post‐1990).
• Revised Penal Code, Article 171(4) – falsification of public documents by making untruthful statements in narration of facts.
• Local Government Code (R.A. No. 7160), Section 79 – prohibition on appointments of relatives within the fourth civil degree.
• Administrative Code of 1987, Book V, Rule V, Section 7(e) – CSC disapproval of appointments violating civil service rules.
• Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees (R.A. No. 6713), Section 8(B) – duty to disclose government relatives.
• CSC Memorandum Circulars No. 38 (1993) and No. 40 (1998) – nepotism prohibitions and requirements for appointments.
Factual Background
In 1994 Ong extended permanent appointments to Galeos and Rivera, casual employees since before 1993. Their SALNs (1993–1996) either falsely answered “No” to the question of relatives working in government or left the response blank. Ong administered their oaths on these SALNs and certified compliance with nepotism restrictions in a June 1, 1994 letter to the Civil Service Commission Regional Director. Unbeknownst to third parties, Ong was first cousins with Galeos (mothers were sisters) and related by affinity to Rivera (Rivera’s wife’s mother was Ong’s aunt).
Charges and Informations
The Office of the Ombudsman filed multiple Informations (Criminal Case Nos. 26181–26189) charging Ong, Galeos, and Rivera with falsification of public documents under Article 171(4) of the Revised Penal Code, based on:
• False statements in SALNs for 1993–1996 regarding relatives in government service.
• A letter‐certification falsely declaring compliance with nepotism rules for the appointments.
Trial and Evidence
• Joint Stipulation: Petitioners admitted their familial relationships but claimed ignorance of them at the time of document execution.
• Prosecution Witness: A close neighbor confirmed the familial ties among Ong, Galeos, and Rivera.
• Petitioners’ Testimony: Galeos and Rivera asserted they only signed pre‐filled SALNs without personal knowledge of the “fourth degree” concept. Ong claimed he merely administered oaths, unaware of any kinship, and delegated appointment processes.
Ruling of the Sandiganbayan
The Sandiganbayan convicted Ong and Galeos on eight and four counts, respectively, of falsification of public documents, sentencing them to indeterminate imprisonment (2 years, 4 months, 1 day to 8 years, 1 day) and fines of ₱5,000 per count. Rivera’s cases were dismissed posthumously. One count against Ong (Criminal Case No. 26188) resulted in acquittal for insufficient proof.
Arguments on Appeal
• Petitioners contended that:
– Statements in SALNs and certifications were conclusions of law, not narrations of fact, and thus not falsification.
– They lacked intent and acted in good faith, unaware of any kinship.
– Ong, as oath administrator, had no duty to verify document content.
– The Sandiganbayan overrelied on uncorroborated testimony of a single witness.
Supreme Court’s Analysis
• Falsification Elements:
- Untruthful statements in narration of facts.
- Legal obligation to disclose the truth.
- Absolute falsity of t
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 174730-37)
Background and Procedural History
- Consolidated petitions in G.R. Nos. 174730-37 and 174845-52 challenged the Sandiganbayan’s August 18, 2005 Decision.
- Petitioners were convicted of falsification of public documents under Article 171(4) of the Revised Penal Code.
- Criminal charges were filed by the Ombudsman on August 11, 2000 based on alleged SALN falsifications and a June 1, 1994 certification.
Appointment and Kinship Facts
- Ong served as OIC-Mayor of Naga, Cebu (1986), elected Mayor (1988–1998), then Vice-Mayor.
- On June 1, 1994, Ong appointed Galeos (Construction and Maintenance Man) and Rivera (Plumber I) to permanent posts.
- Joint stipulation: Ong is first cousin to Galeos (mothers are sisters) and cousin-in-law to Rivera (Rivera’s wife’s mother is Ong’s mother’s sister).
SALN Disclosures and Omissions
- 1993 SALN: Galeos answered “No” to relatives in government; Rivera wrote “n/a.”
- 1994–1996 SALNs: Galeos left kinship question blank; Rivera answered “No” in 1995 and left 1996 blank.
- Ong administered and swore to the SALNs of Galeos and Rivera each year.
June 1, 1994 Certification to CSC
- Certification letter to CSC Region VII asserted full compliance with R.A. 7160 requirements on staffing, appropriations, and nepotism.
- Signed by Ong (Mayor) and HR Officer-Designate Editha C. Garcia.
- Represented faithful observance of Civil Service restrictions prior to CSC review of appointments.
Ombudsman Complaint and Informations
- October 1, 1998: Sangguniang Bayan of Naga filed complaint with the Ombudsman alleging dishonesty, nepotism, and falsification.
- August 16, 2000: Informations in Criminal Case Nos. 26181–26189 accused Ong, Galeos, and Rivera of falsifying SALNs (as of Dec. 31, 1993–1996) and the June 1, 1994 certification.
Trial Admissions and Witness Testimony
- Petitioners admitted mayoral incumbency, kinship ties, and municipal employme