Case Summary (G.R. No. 234435-36)
Procedural History
The Sandiganbayan convicted both petitioners:
• Under RA 3019 § 3(e): 6 years 1 month to 10 years imprisonment, perpetual disqualification.
• Under RA 8291 IRR: 2 to 4 years imprisonment, PHP 3,000 fine, absolute disqualification.
Their motions for reconsideration were denied. They filed a Rule 45 petition before the Supreme Court contesting the Informations, delays in proceedings, and the corrupt-practice conviction.
Issues
I. Whether the Informations violated the right to be informed of the accusation’s nature and cause.
II. Whether there was a violation of the right to speedy disposition of the cases.
III. Correctness of convictions under (a) RA 8291 IRR §§ 17.2.3/17.2.6 and (b) RA 3019 § 3(e).
Right to Be Informed
The Court found the Informations sufficient under Rule 110. Inclusion of alleged co-conspirators (accountant, budget officer) was unnecessary. An information need only allege the essential facts constituting the offense to allow an intelligent plea and defense.
Right to Speedy Disposition
Applying the four-factor balancing test (length and reason for delay; assertion of right; prejudice), the Court ruled the delay was largely self-inflicted by petitioners through repeated motions and extensions. No oppressive incarceration or impairment of defense was shown; petitioners acquiesced and waived any speedy-trial claim.
RA 3019 § 3(e) Analysis
Conviction under Section 3(e) requires proof of manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence causing undue injury. Mere non-remittance does not prove bad faith or gross negligence. Absent evidence of malicious motive or conscious wrongdoing, the petitioners’ conviction for corrupt practices could not stand. They were acquitted under RA 3019.
RA 8291 Analysis
RA 8291 and IRR §§ 17.2.3/17.2.6 impose criminal liability for failure, refusal, or delay (beyond 30 days) in remitting GSIS contributions by designated officers. Such offenses are mala prohibita and do not require proof of corruption, only an intent to omit remittance. Petitioners admitted non-remittance and offered no absolute defense. Their reactive efforts (2003 meeting; 2006 MOA) did not excuse initial failu
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 234435-36)
Procedural History
- Petitioners Ismael (Municipal Mayor) and Ajijon (Municipal Treasurer) were charged before the Sandiganbayan in Criminal Case Nos. 28278 and 28279 for non-remittance of GSIS contributions.
- In Criminal Case No. 28278, they were accused of violating Section 3(e) of RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act).
- In Criminal Case No. 28279, they were accused of violating Section 3.3.1, in relation to Section 17.2.3 of the IRR of RA 8291.
- On August 2, 2017, the Sandiganbayan convicted both petitioners in both cases and imposed indeterminate prison terms and disqualifications.
- Their Motion for Reconsideration was denied on September 19, 2017.
- They filed a Verified Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 before the Supreme Court, seeking dismissal or modification of the convictions.
Facts
- Since 1997, the Municipality of Lantawan, Basilan had accumulated arrears in GSIS premiums due to penalties and non-remittance.
- Collection letters covering January 1999–June 2001 and July 2001–February 2003 were sent to the Mayor’s office but went unheeded.
- GSIS loan privileges of municipal employees were suspended for non-remittance.
- Vice Mayor Dalugdugan and other officials filed a malversation complaint before the Ombudsman on June 28, 2004.
- The Ombudsman elevated charges for corrupt practices and GSIS-related non-remittance to the Sandiganbayan.
Informations and Charges
- Criminal Case No. 28278 (Section 3(e) RA 3019): Petitioners, conspiring from July 2001 to February 2003, willfully and unlawfully caused undue injury by withholding PHP 3,118,005.07 in GSIS contributions.
- Criminal Case No. 28279 (Section 3.3.1 IRR RA 8291): Petitioners, in their official capacities, failed or delayed remittance of the same amount, deducted monthly from municipal employees’ salaries.
Sandiganbayan Decision
- Found both petitioners guilty beyond reasonable doubt in both cases:
• Case 28278: Indeterminate imprisonment of 6 years 1 month to 10 years, perpetual disqualification (Section 3[e], RA 3019).
• Case 28279: Indeterminate imprisonment of 2 to 4 years, fine of PHP 3,000, absolute perpetual disqualification (Section 3.3.1 IRR RA 8291). - Motion for Reconsideration denied on September 1