Title
Lopez vs. Sandiganbayan
Case
G.R. No. 103911
Decision Date
Oct 13, 1995
A donated ambulance intended for Mati was used by Davao Oriental Province. Mayor Lopez, accused of graft, was cleared as he wasn’t mayor during the donation, and the ambulance served Mati’s residents.
charges dismissed
donated ambulance
no probable cause

Case Summary (G.R. No. 103911)

Donation, Delivery Arrangements, and Subsequent Handling of the Ambulance Van

On December 10, 1987, the PCSO executed a Deed of Donation of a single Mitsubishi L-300 van “for use as an ambulance” in favor of the Municipality of Mati. The Municipality was represented in the deed by Governor Leopoldo N. Lopez, who accepted the donation within the same deed. After acceptance, the ambulance was shipped from North Harbor, Manila, to Davao Oriental via Davao City, with a clearance from the Constabulary Highway Patrol Group. Freight charges were paid by Governor Lopez, and the Delivery Cargo Receipt indicated Governor Lopez as consignee.

At that time, Hon. Salvador R. Gutierrez was acting Officer-In-Charge of the Office of the Mayor of Mati. When the mayoralty office was later turned over to petitioner, acting mayor Gutierrez was said to have “forgot all about the ambulance,” and had not effectively informed petitioner that an ambulance had been donated to the Municipality. After Governor Lopez was purged and Atty. Teodoro Palma Gil was installed as OIC of the Office of the Provincial Governor, Acting Governor Palma Gil instructed that the van, to be converted into an ambulance, was intended for the Davao Provincial Hospital and, because the hospital was in Mati, the Acting Governor requested that the municipality shoulder the shipping and conversion expenses. The vehicle was insured and registered in the name of the Province of Davao Oriental. As a result, the van was never turned over to the Municipality of Mati.

Destruction of the Vehicle and Ombudsman-Initiated Criminal Complaint

On September 17, 1988, the ambulance was reportedly set on fire in Barangay Barol, Municipality of Lupon, while on its way to Davao City, and was completely burned by unidentified armed men. Political adversaries of Governor Leopoldo Lopez filed a complaint with the Ombudsman, charging Governor Leopoldo N. Lopez, the newly-elected Mayor Edgardo E. Lopez, and others with Violation of R.A. 3019. A regularly deputized Ombudsman prosecutor, Provincial Prosecutor Salvador Bijis, initially dismissed the complaint for lack of merit. The Ombudsman reopened the investigation and designated investigator Gay Maggie Balajadia, who recommended filing of an Information for R.A. 3019 against Governor Lopez and Mayor Lopez.

The recommended Information was filed on August 3, 1991 before the Sandiganbayan and docketed as Criminal Case No. 16987. After reinvestigation upon motions of both accused, the prosecution filed an Amended Information that named petitioner Edgardo E. Lopez alone, because Governor Lopez had already died on August 12, 1991.

The Amended Information and Petitioner’s Motion to Quash

The amended Information alleged that on or about December 10, 1987, in the Province of Davao Oriental, and within the Sandiganbayan’s jurisdiction, the accused—described as the then Municipal Mayor of Mati—conspired with the deceased Governor Leopoldo N. Lopez, then Provincial Governor, to cause undue injury to the Municipality of Mati by (a) receiving without authority an ambulance van donated by the PCSO to the Municipality of Mati, (b) failing to deliver it to the Municipality, and (c) registering it in the name of the Province of Davao Oriental and allowing appropriation and use inconsistent with the municipality’s ownership. It further alleged that petitioner, being aware of the donation for municipal use, failed to recover the vehicle, acknowledged the Province as the actual donee, and allowed appropriation, allegedly causing undue injury to the Municipality and its residents who were unjustifiably deprived of ownership, possession, and use of the vehicle and the health service it was meant to provide.

Petitioner moved to quash on two grounds: first, that the Sandiganbayan had no jurisdiction over the offense charged; and second, that criminal liability had been extinguished, asserting that at the time of the donation on December 10, 1987, he was not yet Municipal Mayor but merely a member of the Sangguniang Bayan. He maintained that the Municipality had an Acting Mayor then (Gutierrez), that the donation was accepted and received by Governor Lopez, and that he had no participation in the acquisition, registration, and use of the vehicle. He also asserted that he took his oath only on February 2, 1988, before RTC Judge Agton.

Sandiganbayan’s Denial of the Motion to Quash

The Sandiganbayan denied the motion to quash. It reasoned that petitioner’s arguments were premised on evidentiary matters appropriate for trial rather than for resolution on a motion to quash. It further stated that although the amended Information alleged December 10, 1987, petitioner’s participation was found by the prosecution to be subsequent to December 10, 1987 and continuing until alleged periods up to July 15, 1988 and October 5, 1990. The Sandiganbayan also emphasized that conspiracy was alleged, and it concluded that conspiracy allegations supported jurisdiction over the persons involved, regardless of the death of a co-conspirator.

Ultimately, it held that the nature, scope, and legal consequences of the inculpatory allegations as to petitioner remained to be ascertained during trial.

Issues Raised in the Petition for Certiorari

Petitioner sought certiorari to annul the Sandiganbayan resolution, arguing: first, that the Sandiganbayan acted arbitrarily in ruling that it had jurisdiction over the offense charged; second, that it acted arbitrarily in refusing to pass upon the validity of petitioner’s defenses; and third, that the court erred in its approach by not considering decisive matters relevant to the charge.

The Supreme Court’s Treatment of Judicial Admissions and Mandatory Judicial Notice

The Court ruled that petitioner’s factual defenses were matters that fell under mandatory judicial notice. It acknowledged that defenses ordinarily involve evidentiary questions reserved for trial. However, it held that the facts petitioner relied upon were already admitted in the prosecution’s pleadings and in the prosecutors’ reports from the preliminary investigation. The Court thus rejected the Sandiganbayan’s statement that the “nature, scope and legal consequences” of the allegations as to petitioner would still need to be ascertained during trial in the face of admissions relevant to petitioner’s status at the time charged.

The Court considered it proper to take judicial notice that petitioner took his oath before Judge Agton, relying on an official certification of the relevant record. The Court explained that an oath taking is an official act, and the certification by a government records officer is also an official act of an executive official. It treated the prosecution’s admissions as binding judicial admissions that were sufficient to resolve the motion to quash.

Binding Admissions on Petitioner’s Non-Mayoral Status on December 10, 1987

The Court noted that the prosecution had admitted that petitioner was not yet the Municipal Mayor of Mati “on or about December 10, 1987,” and that he became mayor only after February 2, 1988. Such an admission, according to the Court, constituted a judicial admission binding upon the prosecution. Consequently, the Court held that the accusation—by alleging that petitioner was the municipal mayor at the time of the acts specifically referenced—was falsely made in the face of admitted facts.

The Court also addressed the prosecution’s insinuation that petitioner’s participation was “subsequent” to December 10, 1987, but it held that this did not justify sustaining the Sandiganbayan’s refusal to consider the key admitted fact contradicting the amended Information’s framing of petitioner as the mayor on December 10, 1987.

Discussion on the Substantive Logic of the Alleged Injury and the Donation’s Purpose

The Court further considered the nature of the donation and the actual handling of the vehicle. It did not treat the case as a scenario where the ambulance van was improperly diverted in a manner that would necessarily show prejudice to the municipality or to public service. It reasoned that when the vehicle was in substance accepted and used as a provincial hospital ambulance for the Davao Oriental Provincial Hospital, it served a public health purpose for the people of Mati—namely, the very municipality alleged to have been prejudiced.

The Court found persuasive the earlier reasoning of Prosecutor Bijis: that the municipality of Mati did not run a hospital or medical clinic of its own; the existing government hospital in Mati was the Davao Oriental Provincial Hospital; and, given the deed’s reference to the PCSO donation pursuant to President Corazon C. Aquino’s campaign for better health and medical facilities, the donation was necessarily intended for the provincial hospital situated within the territorial area of Mati. The Court characterized as “strange and convoluted” any attempt t

...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.

About Privacy Terms