Case Summary (G.R. No. 185960)
Applicable Law
The accusations against Icdang were rooted in violations of Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019, which pertains to the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. The law establishes accountability for public officers regarding public funds and stipulates penalties for malversation.
Factual Background
The case arose from a Special Audit conducted by the Commission on Audit (COA) Regional Office XII. This audit uncovered that Icdang had unliquidated cash advances amounting to P219,392.75 despite receiving total cash advances of P232,000.00 for various socio-economic projects intended for the cultural communities in his region. The audit findings indicated systematic deficiencies, including the absence of official cashbooks and unimplemented projects funded by public money.
Proceedings and Findings
Hadji Rashid A. Mudag, the sole witness for the prosecution and State Auditor IV, provided testimony that supported the audit team's findings. The audit revealed that the projects financed by these advances were either poorly managed or never executed. Icdang’s responses to the demands for accountability were insufficient, and he failed to refute the claims made against him comprehensively.
Conviction and Sentencing
On May 26, 2008, the Sandiganbayan convicted Icdang of malversation of public funds, sentencing him to an indeterminate penalty ranging from ten years and one day of prisión mayor to eighteen years, eight months, and one day of reclusión temporal. Additionally, he faced perpetual special disqualification and a fine of P196,000 without subsidiary imprisonment. However, he was acquitted of an ancillary charge under the Anti-Graft Law due to insufficient evidence.
Legal Arguments on Appeal
Icdang’s motion for reconsideration addressed alleged procedural improprieties, including lack of legal counsel during the promulgation of the judgment and failures by his former counsel to file necessary motions during the trial. His petition under Rule 65 claimed grave abuse of discretion by the Sandiganbayan, asserting that he was not afforded due process.
Court's Ruling on Appeal
The court dismissed Icdang's petition, emphasizing that certiorari under Rule 65 was not the appropriate avenue to contest the conviction, as the proper method would have been a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45. The court reaffirmed that I
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 185960)
Case Overview
- Court: Supreme Court of the Philippines
- Division: First Division
- G.R. No.: 185960
- Date of Decision: January 25, 2012
- Petitioner: Marino B. Icdang
- Respondents: Sandiganbayan (Second Division) and People of the Philippines
- Nature of Petition: Petition for certiorari under Rule 65
- Subject Matter: Conviction for malversation of public funds
Factual Antecedents
- Position of Petitioner: Marino B. Icdang was the Regional Director of the Office for Southern Cultural Communities (OSCC) Region XII in Cotabato City during the relevant transactions.
- Special Audit Team Formation: A Special Audit Team was organized by the Commission on Audit (COA) Regional Office XII on January 19, 1998, to audit the 1996 funds allocated for livelihood projects.
- Audit Findings: The audit revealed unliquidated cash advances totaling P219,392.75 out of the P920,933.00 allocated.
- Cash advances of P407,000.00 were issued from October 1996 to February 1997, with P297,392.75 remaining unliquidated by December 31, 1997.
- Documentation: Petitioner admitted to receiving P196,000.00 evidenced by disbursement vouchers and checks.
- Audit Observation Memorandum: Key findings included the failure to implement proposed projects and maintain official cashbooks for recording cash advances.
Criminal Charges
- Allegations: Petitioner was charged with malversation of public funds under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code and violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practi