Title
Lihaylihay vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 191219
Decision Date
Jul 31, 2013
PNP officers convicted for approving "ghost" purchases of P8M in combat gear, violating RA 3019, with evident bad faith and conspiracy proven; Supreme Court upheld Sandiganbayan's decision.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 191219)

Facts

The case arose from a special audit report by the Commission on Audit, which prompted the PNP to conduct an internal investigation that uncovered purported ghost purchases of combat clothing and individual equipment (CCIE). Charges were brought against ten officers, including Vinluan and Lihaylihay, for conspiring to defraud the government by falsely certifying deliveries and accepting payments for non-existent equipment. Four of the named officers died before the case was resolved, and Chief Supt. Jose M. Aquino was dropped from the charges.

Sandiganbayan Ruling

The Sandiganbayan, in its August 8, 2008 decision, exonerated one co-accused but found Vinluan and Lihaylihay, along with another officer, guilty of violating Section 3(e) of RA 3019. The court established that they, as public officers, engaged in evident bad faith, causing undue injury to the government by certifying that the CCIE items were delivered and inspected when they were not. They were sentenced to imprisonment and ordered to indemnify the government the total amount involved.

Issue Before the Court

The primary issue was whether the conviction of Lihaylihay and Vinluan for violating Section 3(e) of RA 3019 was justified based on the evidence presented.

Court's Ruling

The petition for review was denied by the Supreme Court, affirming the Sandiganbayan's findings. The Supreme Court reiterated that appeals in this context focus exclusively on questions of law rather than fact. It underscored that all essential elements of the crime were met: the petitioners were public officers, acted with evident bad faith, and their actions led to substantial losses for the government.

Public Office and Responsibilities

As public officers, Vinluan and Lihaylihay had specific responsibilities pertaining to the oversight of procurement processes. The court emphasized that their failure to exercise due diligence in their roles — particularly in light of clear irregularities in the documentation — indicated a deliberate neglect of their duties.

Conspiracy and Bad Faith

The court found sufficient evidence of conspiracy, as the actions of Vinluan and Lihaylihay collectively suggested a shared intent to defraud the government. The court noted that their certification of the invoices and reports, despite significant flaws and tampering, was indicative of bad faith.

Evidence and Admission

On the issue of evidentiary admissibility, the Supreme Court indica

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.