Case Summary (G.R. No. 168632)
Petitioners and Respondent
Petitioners: GMA and Aguas, charged with conspiracy to commit plunder of PCSO’s confidential and intelligence fund.
Respondent: Sandiganbayan, which denied their demurrers to evidence and motions for reconsideration.
Key Dates
• July 10, 2012: Ombudsman files plunder charge (SB-12-CRM-0174).
• June 6, 2013: Bail granted to some co-accused; GMA/Aguas bail petitions denied Nov 5, 2013.
• April 6, 2015: Sandiganbayan denies GMA/Aguas demurrers to evidence.
• September 10, 2015: Motions for reconsideration denied.
• July 19, 2016: Supreme Court issues decision.
Applicable Law
• 1987 Philippine Constitution (post-1990 cases).
• RA 7080, as amended by RA 7659 (Plunder Law).
• Republic Act No. 1169 (PCSO Charter).
• PD 1445 (Government Auditing Code).
• LOI 1282 (Presidential Letter of Instruction on intelligence funds).
• COA Circulars No. 92-385 and 2003-002 (audit and liquidation of confidential/intelligence funds).
Background
From January 2008 to June 2010, PCSO’s Operating Fund was repeatedly tapped to the tune of ₱365,997,915.00 through its Confidential/Intelligence Fund (CIF). Accused PCSO officials allegedly commingled PCSO’s main funds, sought presidential approval for additional CIF well beyond budget, and failed to account for expenditures.
Prosecution’s Evidence
• COA audit reports documented co-mingling of Prize, Charity, and Operating Funds in one account.
• Atty. Aleta Tolentino (CPA/lawyer, PCSO Audit Committee) reviewed COA Annual Reports (2006–2009) and found repeated CIF over-disbursements:
– 2008: P86,555,060 disbursed vs. P28 million budget.
– 2009: P138,420,875 vs. P60 million budget.
– Jan–Jun 2010: P141,021,980 vs. P60 million budget.
• President Arroyo affixed unqualified “OK” on seven (7) separate Uriarte letter-requests for additional CIF (from P25 million to P150 million).
• COA Circulars require: CIF in Corporate Operating Budget; presidential approval; designation of Special Disbursing Officer (SDO); fidelity bonds; specific project details; one-month liquidation.
• Uriarte was officially designated SDO only in February 2009; prior CIF withdrawals lacked proper designation and liquidation.
• Aguas certified 23 disbursement vouchers claiming adequate funds, proper certification, supporting documents, and prior liquidation—none of which existed.
• Intelligence chiefs of the AFP, PNP, and NBI testified to no PCSO-funded operations for stated purposes (e.g., bomb threats, terrorism, security relations).
• COA Credit Notices clearing CIF accountabilities were issued on deficient liquidation reports, omitting audit certifications.
Procedural History
- GMA/Aguas bail petitions denied on strong evidence ground (Nov 5, 2013).
- Prosecution rested; GMA, Aguas, Valencia, Morato, Roquero, Taruc, Villar filed demurrers to evidence.
- Sandiganbayan granted demurrers of Morato, Roquero, Taruc, Villar (Apr 6, 2015); denied demurrers of GMA, Aguas, Valencia.
- Motions for reconsideration denied Sept 10, 2015.
- GMA and Aguas filed separate certiorari petitions before the Supreme Court.
Issues
- Is certiorari the proper remedy to challenge denial of demurrer to evidence?
- Did the Sandiganbayan gravely abuse its discretion in denying GMA/Aguas demurrers?
- Did the prosecution establish conspiracy among GMA, Aguas, and Uriarte?
- Were all elements of plunder proved, including:
• Overt acts of raiding public treasury?
• Threshold amount of ill-gotten wealth (≥ ₱50 M)?
• Amassing, accumulating, or acquiring ill-gotten wealth?
Supreme Court Ruling
• Proper Remedy: Certiorari may lie despite interlocutory nature of denial orders when there is grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack/excess of jurisdiction.
• Conspiracy: No proof of explicit or implied agreement among GMA, Aguas, and Uriarte to commit plunder.
• Overt Acts: Presidential “OK” did not evince knowledge of irregular scheme; Aguas’s certifi
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 168632)
Antecedents
- On July 10, 2012 the Ombudsman charged 10 public officers, including former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA) and PCSO Budget and Accounts Officer Benigno B. Aguas (Aguas), with plunder before the Sandiganbayan (SB-12-CRM-0174).
- The accused included PCSO officials (Uriarte, Valencia, Morato, Taruc V, Roquero, Valdes), COA officers (Villar, Plaras), and GMA.
- By late 2012 and early 2013 the SB acquired jurisdiction over GMA, Valencia, Morato, Aguas and some co-accused; Uriarte and Valdes remained at large; Plaras obtained TRO.
Information and Charge
- The Information alleged that from January 2008 to June 2010 GMA, Uriarte, Valencia, Morato, Taruc V, Roquero, Valdes, Aguas, Villar and Plaras “conniving, conspiring and confederating,” unlawfully diverted PCSO Operating Funds into a Confidential/Intelligence Fund (CIF) and then looted P365,997,915.00.
- Three predicate schemes under Section 1(d) of RA 7080 were cited:
• Diversion of Operating Fund to CIF and fictitious expenditures for personal benefit
• Raiding the public treasury through irregular withdrawals
• Taking advantage of official position to unjustly enrich themselves
Pretrial and Bail Proceedings
- Co-accused Valencia, Morato, Roquero granted bail in mid-2013; GMA and Aguas denied bail (Nov 5, 2013) for strong evidence.
- Bail motions of GMA and Aguas denied again on Feb 19, 2014; GMA’s appeal remains pending.
- Taruc and Villar later granted bail in 2014 after SB found weak evidence against them.
Trial and Prosecution Evidence
- Main prosecution witness: Atty. Aleta Tolentino (CPA, lawyer, PCSO Audit Committee Chair).
• Found PCSO funds co-mingled in one account, violating RA 1169 §6 and COA rules
• Documented repeated over-allocations and disbursements of CIF in 2008–2010 that far exceeded approved budgets (e.g. P86.6 M vs. P28 M; P138.4 M vs. P60 M; P141.0 M vs. P60 M)
• Noted absence of separate Prize and Charity Fund deposits despite COA recommendations
• Charted the five-step CIF release/liquidation process: allocation → Presidential approval →