Title
Navarra vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 224943
Decision Date
Mar 20, 2017
Corporate president convicted for failing to remit P10M SSS contributions, upheld by courts despite claims of financial difficulties and settlement attempts.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 224943)

Applicable Law

The legal framework governing this case includes Republic Act No. 8282, also known as the Social Security Law, which was amended to strengthen the Social Security System (SSS) in the Philippines.

Background of the Case

The case originated from an Information filed on January 18, 2001, which charged Navarra with violating Section 22 (a), in relation to Section 28 (h) and (f) of RA 8282, concerning the non-remittance of SSS contributions. The specific allegations were that from July 1997 to June 2000, Navarra and other board members at FENICS failed to remit both the withheld employee contributions and the employer’s counterpart contributions, accumulating to a total unpaid obligation of approximately P10 million.

Proceedings at the Regional Trial Court

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Muntinlupa City found Navarro guilty beyond reasonable doubt in its March 13, 2013 ruling, leading to a significant sentence of four years and two months to twenty years of imprisonment, along with a financial obligation to pay the SSS over P9 million plus accruing interest. The RTC dismissed the defense arguments regarding the company's operational status and the custody of contributions, emphasizing the implications of Navarra's letters for settlements as acknowledgments of liability.

Court of Appeals Ruling

Navarra subsequently appealed the RTC's decision to the Court of Appeals (CA), which upheld the conviction on October 29, 2015. The CA determined that objections regarding the Information's validity were waived by Navarra’s failure to raise them prior to his plea. It reinforced that due to FENICS's corporate status, the personal liability of officers like Navarra is applicable given their failure to remit contributions.

Supreme Court's Resolution

Upon further review, the Supreme Court dismissed Navarra's petition, affirming the CA's decision. The Court ruled that his failure to object to the Information prior to arraignment amounted to a waiver of that argument. The Court's analysis confirmed that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that during the relev

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.