Case Summary (G.R. No. 133917)
Charges Filed
On April 28, 2015, two Informations were filed before the Sandiganbayan against Gelacio, numbered SB-15-CRM-0101 and SB-15-CRM-0102. The first charge, under Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act), accused Gelacio of soliciting and accepting a total of P120,000.00 and a whole tuna fish in exchange for issuing a temporary restraining order (TRO) and writ of preliminary injunction (WPI) in DARAB Case No. XII-990-SC-2007. The second charge, under Section 7(d) of Republic Act No. 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees), accused him of similarly soliciting and accepting gifts during the course of his official duties.
Trial Proceedings
During the arraignment, Gelacio pleaded not guilty, and during pre-trial, relevant facts regarding his position and the assignment of the DARAB case were stipulated. The prosecution presented witnesses, including Lorna Nietes Garte, the Supervising Agrarian Reform Program Officer; Atty. Johnny Landero, the counsel for the complainants; Herminigilda Garbo, a co-complainant; and Dominador Egagamao, another co-complainant. Their testimonies pointed to Gelacio directly soliciting bribes for favorable judicial action.
Evidence presented by Prosecution
The prosecution's evidence established that complaints were filed by farmers against DARAB, which Gelacio presided over. Atty. Landero detailed interactions where private complainant Eduardito Garbo, along with his wife, handed money and a tuna fish to Gelacio. Witnesses corroborated these transactions, asserting that payments were necessary for securing procedural remedies from Gelacio. The prosecution argued that these actions led to significant distress among the complainants, as they had to sell livestock and tools under duress.
Defense Arguments
Gelacio's defense presented his own testimony and that of his witnesses, including Bebiano Egagamao and Atty. Noli Lechonsito. Gelacio insisted on his innocence, stating that the accusations were unsubstantiated and that prior disbarment allegations against him were dismissed. The defense claimed that any money exchanged was directed to Atty. Landero, not Gelacio, suggesting that the complainants’ own actions constituted wrongful conduct.
Sandiganbayan Ruling
On April 29, 2019, the Sandiganbayan convicted Gelacio for both charges, citing overwhelming evidence of solicitation and corruption. He was sentenced to imprisonment for six years and one month to eight years for the violation of RA 3019, alongside perpetual disqualification from public office. For the violation of RA 6713, he was to serve a lesser sentence, which the court deemed unnecessary given the gravity of the first charge.
Appeal and Legal Findings
Gelacio appealed, challenging the evidentiary basis of the Sandiganbayan’s ruling, claiming reliance on hearsay due to the absence of the principal witness, Eduardito Garbo. He argued for the dismissal of the RA 6713 charge, asserting that both charges stemmed from the same set of facts and violated the principle of double jeopardy as outlined in the
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 133917)
Case Overview
- The case is an appeal from the April 29, 2019 Decision and the June 26, 2019 Resolution of the Sandiganbayan, Sixth Division.
- Accused-appellant Henry M. Gelacio was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violating Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) and Section 7(d) of Republic Act No. 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees).
Antecedents
- Henry M. Gelacio served as the Regional Agrarian Reform Adjudicator of the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) in Region XII, Kidapawan City.
- Two Informations were filed against him on April 28, 2015, for soliciting and accepting a total of P120,000.00 and a whole tuna fish in exchange for issuing a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and a Writ of Preliminary Injunction (WPI) in DARAB Case No. XII-990-SC-2007.
- The prosecution’s claims included the undue injury to complainants who were forced to sell their farm animals and tools to pay Gelacio.
Charges Against Accused-Appellant
Charge 1 (SB-15-CRM-0101): Violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019:
- Accused-appellant demanded and extorted P120,000.00 and a tuna fish from complainants in exchange for favorable provisional remedies.
Charge 2 (SB-15-CRM-0102): Violation of Section 7(d) of R.A. No. 6713:
- Accused-appellant solicited and accepted the same amounts and items under similar circumstances.
Proceedings and Testimonies
Plea: Accused-appellant pleaded not guilty during arraignment.
Witnesses for Prosecution:
- Lorna Nietes Garte (DARAB Clerk), Atty. Johnny